The Struggle for Symbolic Space: The Choice of the Patron-Spirit of the City of Kazan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the article, the concept of “genius of a place” is defined as a historical or mythological character of particular importance for the locality, possible applicants for the role of “genius of a place” in Kazan are considered, the political and social mechanisms that determine the nomination of one or another applicant are identified. The authors suggest that the “genius of the place” of Kazan is not a certain static, formed, and integral image. The population of Kazan is heterogeneous, and the various groups of its constituents — the administrative and managerial elite and the intelligentsia, conservatives and liberals, Russians and Tatars — have their idea of what the “genius of the place” of Kazan should look like. Researchers come to the conclusion that the “genius of the place” is an embodied group sociocultural ideal, and the struggle and conflicts taking place in a symbolic form partly prevent the transformation of existing intergroup contradictions into real ethnosocial and ethnopolitical conflicts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".