Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tensions between western scientific and alternative medicine become more palpable during times of uncertainty. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a period of confusion, evoking mistrust of conventional medicine, which has been unable to fully protect people from this new disease. Gis situation has compelled some to seek help and comfort elsewhere. This article demonstrates how people in post-Soviet countries and post-Soviet diasporic communities resurrected their faith and trust in Anatoly Kashpirovsky, a legendary psychotherapist and charismatic leader who first rose to prominence in the USSR in the 1980-90s. On the basis of digital fieldwork conducted during the lockdown, I showcase how Kashpirovsky once again became popular in 2020 at a moment of global economic, social and political instability. While Kashpirovsky’s audience finds comfort in his professional training and medical experience, his YouTube “health sessions” offer treatments for COVID-19 that relegate him to the realm of folk healer, magician, or psychic.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".