Cooperation between Russia and Italy within the framework of EU programs in scientific sphere in the first quarter of the XXI century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses the key vectors of humanitarian cooperation between Russia and the European Union in the area of science in the first quarter of the XXI century. Italy as the EU member-state with high scientific capacity manifests as a direct subject for the analysis of peculiarities of this cooperation. The selected chronology is substantiated by the fact that most intensive cooperation between Russia and EU in humanitarian sphere falls on that period. Determination of the key vectors of cooperation between Russia and Italy in the XXI century allows tracing the dynamics of Russia-EU relations in the indicated field at the current stage. The scientific novelty is defined by the absence of research dedicated to international cooperation of Russia and Italy. The following conclusions are formulated: 1) since 2012 there is observed a certain decline in the intensity of scientific and technical cooperation between Russia and EU due to political contradictions that aggravated after 2014; 2) at the same time, the foundation formed in the previous decades allowed transferring the scientific and technical cooperation from the political level into the practical, namely to the sphere of direct interaction between the Russian scholars from the EU member-states (including Italian); 3) a crucial role was played by the nonprofit sector and large enterprises that are interested in the advancement of innovations; 4) therefore, namely the contacts between universities, research centers, innovation organizations, and scholars may become the foundation for the development of comprehensive cooperation between Russia and the European Union. The obtained experience demonstrates that many crucial steps in this direction have already been taken.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".