Bibliographic record
Abstract
The very phrase «Euro-Atlantic solidarity» primarily presupposes an appeal to the foreign policy activities of the states of North America (USA and Canada) and the European Union. A priori, it is aimed at coordinating national and global strategies designed to determine the relations of the countries of this community with the outside world. Most analysts agree that it was this solidarity that was the first and perhaps the biggest and most sensitive victim of the Donald Trump administration's policies. The author of the article believes that after the 45th president leaves the White House, transatlantic solidarity will receive a tangible impetus for its renewal. While maintaining its basic foundations in the form of liberal-democratic values, however, relations between the two shores of the Atlantic are likely to be restructured in a somewhat different paradigm than before. During the Trump presidency, both the United States and Western Europe have practically formed two visions of the correctness of the foundations of transatlantic solidarity. In some aspects, they coincide, while in others they may diverge.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| 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".