The Outlooks of Using the European Populists Experience in the Development of Political Parties in the Post-Soviet Space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study features prospects for the implementation of European experience in the development of political parties in the post-Soviet states. The methodology of the study is based on a combination of descriptive analysis with case study. The article shed light on the fact that the experience of European populists can be successfully employed in the post-Soviet countries, but to a limited degree. First, a favorable environment for its application is present in states where there is no vertical power structure that help elites to integrate, and establishment groups have a substantial resource potential and can politically challenge respective opponents’ control over key political institutions. Accordingly, it can be employed at the regional level, in depressed areas that are not essential to the stability of the political system and have long been governed ineffectively. Bearing in mind ways and means of the European populists, it can be concluded that in order to avoid sanctions their experience can be successfully applied by those groups within the non-mainstream opposition that are exploited by the factions of the ruling establishment to organize attacks on competitors.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".