Bibliographic record
Abstract
The old debate in history on how much individual leaders matter compared to underlying forces that move things is explored in this chapter for the post-communist transition episode. Key leaders in Central Europe, like Havel and Klaus in Czechoslovakia, and Wałęsa, Mazowiecki, and Balcerowicz in Poland, may have had the historical force of a return to prewar Europe behind them, but it was their strong commitment that resulted in seizing the opportunity of 1989’s critical juncture and moving fast to consolidate Big Bang reforms before old and new vested interests could capture the process. In Bulgaria, Romania, and even more so farther east, remnants of the old elite did not have this commitment and used the excuse of historical inertia to slow the process to their personal benefit. The best example of this was the almost complete lack of reforms in the three years of Kravchuk’s presidency in Ukraine. Some exceptions on both sides existed – Slovakia and Serbia hesitated despite the European heritage, while Yeltsin in Russia without this incentive initially tried to leverage this critical juncture into real reforms led by a capable and committed reformer Gaidar – the power of the old-guard interest soon led to aborting this Big Bang effort.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".