Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pervasive corruption at all levels of society was a common feature for the majority of countries from the start of transition and persists to the present day in many. It is not unique to transition; it is widespread in many developing and some developed countries, and was commonplace in the communist period. However, the same divergence seen in the degree of reform and socioeconomic performance applies to corruption. Most in Central Europe and the Baltics experienced significant reductions in socialist corruption soon after reforms began in 1990, and this improvement continues, with a few like Estonia and Slovenia nearly equalling the best of advanced countries. It is not a mere coincidence that the least corrupt were the most reformed and had the highest degree of democracy. Southeast Europe lagged behind, but even there considerable improvements have taken place, probably under pressure of EU requirements for membership accession. The worst levels persist in the former USSR with the heroic exception of Georgia since its Rose Revolution. It seems that formal political “programs” to combat corruption, even with foreign involvement, are far less effective than a committed effort to complete economic democratic and Rule-of-Law reforms.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".