RUSSIAN INFLUENCE ON THE FRENCH CULTURE IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE XX CENTURY (BASED ON FRENCH PRESS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper presents the analysis of French media in the first quarter of the 20th century, affecting the presence of Russian culture in the French society and the impact of theRussians on French culture. The author examines the influence of literature, music, art and theatre on the cultural space of France. Particular attention is paid to the chosen period of time – 1900-1925 as the most fruitful in the history of French-Russian relations – but of course, for the completeness of the study, the historical background of the cultural dialogue between two countries is revealed. The aim of the research is to show opportunities of culture as the soft power on real historical cases and to give an example for future studies in this field in order to improve the brand of Russia abroad. The French media, including the metropolitan and regional press, is in the center of the analysis and special emphasis is put on the differentiation between the periods before and after 1917 as the remarkable date in theRussian history. The undiminished influence of theRussians on French cultural life is shown on the basis of the analysis, in spite of the difficulties in political and international spheres, as well as a lack of politicization in the French media in the articles dedicated to cultural events. The study is characterized by interdisciplinary approach with the application of the theories of Culturology, Sociology and History. The paper is intended fora wide range of specialists and practitioners interested in territorial branding, culturology and media in general.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".