Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article describes activities of the Center for American Studies “Americana” at Volgograd State University in 1995—2020. The authors analyze the conditions that made possible development of American studies in Volgograd in the second half of the 1990s, show what was possible with the limited resources available to the center, and what problems have become difficult for the work of “Americana” in recent years. Teaching Russian and American students, exchange programs and joint online courses, research, publications, “people's diplomacy”, organization of conferences and seminars, uniting historians, political scientists, philologists, linguists, philosophers, architects and other Volgograd scholars in the study of the countries of American continent, creating a network of colleagues and partners from many cities of Russia, as well as from the USA and Canada — looking back over this quarter of a century, we can say with confidence that the Center “Americana” has succeeded. Special attention in the article is paid to the cooperation of the center's historians with literary scholars and linguists who worked in other universities and research organizations. The authors note an institutional asymmetry in the study of Russia in the United States and the United States in Russia: American Russianists find more resources and opportunities in times of exacerbation of Russian — American relations, while Russian Americanists get better opportunities when relations between the two countries improve. Changes in bilateral relations also influenced the activities and capabilities of the Volgograd center. However, it continues to work actively, as shown by a large conference held in Volgograd in September 2020 and the release of the next, 16th issue of the collection Americana in the winter of the same year. This means that the groundwork created in the first 15 years of the research center's service in Volgograd is helping the new generation of Volgograd Americanists get through difficult times.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".