MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190893027 · doi:10.3386/w29089

The Causes of Ukrainian Famine Mortality, 1932-33

2021· preprint· en· W3190893027 on OpenAlexaff
Andreĭ Markevich, Natalya Naumenko, Nancy Qian

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamineUkrainianGeographyArchaeologyLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We construct large, unique panel data to study the causes of Ukrainian famine mortality (Holodomor) during 1932-33 and document several new facts: i) Ukraine (the Soviet Union) produced enough food in 1932 to avoid famine in Ukraine (the Soviet Union); ii) mortality was increasing in the pre-famine ethnic Ukrainian population share and unrelated to food productivity across regions; iii) this pattern exists across the Soviet Union, even outside of Ukraine; iv) the pattern was similar at different administrative levels; v) migration restrictions exacerbated mortality; vi) actual and planned grain procurement were increasing, while actual and planned grain retention (production minus procurement) were decreasing in the ethnic Ukrainian population share across regions.Anti-Ukrainian bias in Soviet policy explains up to 92% of famine mortality in Ukraine and 77% in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus; approximately half of the total effect comes from bias in the centrally planned food procurement policy.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.638
GPT teacher head0.679
Teacher spread0.041 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207