MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rural life of Russian women

2020· article· en· W3035774189 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePOPULATION · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Socio-Economic Development Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRural areaPopulationRural settlementGeographySocioeconomicsRural historyEconomic growthQuarter (Canadian coin)IdeologyPolitical scienceSociologyDemographyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relevance of the study of the living conditions of rural women is related to the actual demographic situation in the Russian hinterland. In rural areas of the Russian Federation there is a stable decline in the population due, first of all, to natural population decrease, as well as migration outflow connected with low standards and quality of life, unattractiveness of labor in rural areas, and social infrastructure. Rural women as a socio-demographic group with typical socio-psychological, ideological, moral and ethno-cultural characteristics, similar spiritual values, social experience and lifestyles, being a more numerous part of the population of rural territories, act as a kind of bulwark for preservation of the village, its culture, traditions and rural economy as a whole. A quarter of all Russian women live in rural areas. Distribution of the country’s population by gender and age groups as of January 1, 2019 shows that women predominate in the rural population (52%). And the group of women over working age is twice as large as that of men (6775 thousand against 3230 thousand). In other words, Russian village has actually a female face. In this regard, the study of rural women’s issues is very important and timely. The article shows the role of women in the social development of the village, provides excerpts from interviews of rural female activists, their reasoning about how they live despite the difficulties that surround them. It highlights demographic trends in rural areas, assesses the quality of the labor potential of rural residents in comparison with urban residents, and shows a higher level of self-realization in labor activity among women than among men.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it