MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The use of the topics and vocabulary of the Second World War in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict 2014-2020 (analysis of foreign historiography)

2021· article· en· W3159179536 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

VenueScienceRise · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and Russian Geopolitical Military Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianHistoriographyVocabularyPolitical scienceLinguisticsHistoryLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The object of research is the latest English literature of scientists and analysts in Western Europe and America, devoted to the problems of the information war waged by the Kremlin authorities against Ukraine. It is the problems, events of the Second World War, in the Russian-speaking academic space and the media that are still referred to only as the Great Patriotic War that became the leitmotif of these actions. Moreover, the history of the war is used precisely speculatively, that is, a careful selection of facts and conclusions is carried out, which are adjusted to certain conceptual foundations. Investigated problem. As a result of a critical analysis of the works of Western authors, the problem posed in this work is solved: to show the objectivity and evidence of the narratives of foreign authors on the biased presentation of the topics and vocabulary of World War II about the events in the East of Ukraine in 2014-2020. Main scientific results. The main scientific result of the study is the conclusion that Western scientists are deeply immersed in the vicissitudes of the conflict, debunking the biased evidence of Russian experts, fascist tendencies are imposed on the basis of false accusations of Ukraine, although such processes have not been recorded by any foreign analysts and observers. One of the stereotypes of Russian propaganda is the reproach for the massive "banderization" of the consciousness of citizens, but at the same time the face and activities of the leader of the OUN (b) are deliberately distorted. Modern studios of historians, diplomats, analysts of Western Europe, the USA, Canada are convincingly criticizing the political and ideological measures of Moscow aimed at discrediting the Ukrainian people. It is emphasized that the process of "nationalization" of history in Ukraine, especially during the Second World War by the Russian establishment, was used in a fraudulent way to tarnish the past of Ukraine. It was noted that, despite all the efforts of the Russian information and propaganda machine, Moscow fails to achieve the desire for results. Scope of practical application. The research results, which are innovative in nature, can be used in both cognitive and educational values.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.236 · 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