MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135912627 · doi:10.1177/0843871421991177

Economic necessity and political reality in the GDR: Establishing an overseas port at Rostock

2021· article· en· W3135912627 on OpenAlexafffund
Joseph A. Stollenwerk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Maritime History · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean history and politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsGeopoliticsPort (circuit theory)PoliticsGermanCold warDemocracyPolitical sciencePolitical economyConvergence (economics)EconomySociologyEconomicsEconomic growthLawGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Opened in April 1960, the overseas port at Rostock resulted from a convergence of factors related to geopolitics, geography, economics and the unique needs and challenges of building a socialist port. Local, national and global pressures played on each other in establishing the port, making Rostock a singular product of the Cold War in the German Democratic Republic. The history of decision-making that went into the building of the port demonstrates the importance of politics in the Cold War, as well as its limits. Although informed by geopolitics, economic decisions in Europe’s socialist economies reflected a broad array of factors. This article argues that national and local decision-makers managed competing regional and national interests in order to develop their own economic strategies that functioned on several different levels. Rostock’s history highlights the common problematic of operating within and outside of the boundaries that the Cold War produced.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.016
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Maritime HistorySame topicEuropean history and politicsFrench-language works237,207