MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172856736

The End of Byelorussian «Miracle»

2011· article· ru· W3172856736 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nikolyuk Sergey

Bibliographic record

VenueВестник общественного мнения: Данные. Анализ. Дискуссии · 2011
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Politics and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpposition (politics)PopulationAuthoritarianismPolitical scienceQuarter (Canadian coin)MiraclePolitical economyEconomic historyDevelopment economicsEconomicsGeographyLawSociologyPoliticsDemographyDemocracy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamics of Belarus population dispositions during 2011 in comparison with the trends of the previous years is analyzed in the article. Dramaticdecline in evaluations of material well-being and overall socio-economic situation in the country has been observed since March till June, and for the first time the Byelorussians mention the President as the main person responsible for worsening the situation (the share of those who do not trust him has exceeded half of the respondents and his electoral rating has fallen to the lowest values during all electoral years). The President blames first of all the population itself, world financial crisis and the government for what has happened. The share of people who claim to be in opposition to the present authorities has increased and exceeds one quarter of population today. Against this background the share of those who prefer entering European Union to drawing nearer to Russia has increased considerably within the last year. However, though distrusting the authoritarian leader of the country the prevalent part of the Byelorussian population haven’t yet rejected an authoritarian ideal.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueВестник общественного мнения: Данные. Анализ. ДискуссииSame topicEuropean Politics and SecurityFrench-language works237,207