MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311872463 · doi:10.1080/1060586x.2022.2156222

Critical approaches and research on inequality in Russian studies: the need for visibility and legitimization

2022· article· en· W4311872463 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePost-Soviet Affairs · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociopolitical Dynamics in Russia
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInequalityDiversity (politics)Multidisciplinary approachContext (archaeology)Variety (cybernetics)VisibilityReproductionSociologyCategorical variableSocial inequalitySocial sciencePolitical scienceEpistemologyPositive economicsGeographyAnthropologyEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay suggests legitimizing and promoting critical approaches in Russian studies, as well as acknowledging the multifaceted diversity within Russian society. This diversity needs to be taken into serious consideration in any research on Russia. Moreover, various levels of inequality that this rich diversity both creates and challenges should be reflected upon in multidisciplinary research, with the focus on historical legacies in the reproduction of those inequalities. The author argues against a limited understanding of inequalities as economic phenomena, and proposes to think about the variety of inequalities that are very prominent in the Russian context: categorical, symbolic, territorial, etc.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.250
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.229 · 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