Bibliographic record
Abstract
the secularism of the state as the second main principle of the relationship between politics and religion has long been conceptually formed and, perhaps, has not yet been completed. For the first time, France officially declared its secularism at the end of the 18th century. After the Great Revolution, the French government abandoned the previous system of relations between politics and religion, declaring the secular (secular) character of the new state. However, if for the XVIII century, such a phenomenon was an exception and revolutionary innovation, then in modern conditions, secularism has become a civilizational norm of the position of the state in relation to religion. Today, the political and legal principle of a secular state is proclaimed in the constitutions of Russia, France, Angola, Azerbaijan, Cameroon, Congo, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mali, and others. Although there is no direct statement in this regard in the constitutions of certain states, there is talk of a non-religious nature and a characteristic state system. However, the list of countries traditionally considered secular is much wider. This usually includes most European countries, the USA, Canada, etc. However, if the declaration of secularism today has become a generally accepted norm in modern countries, then it is by no means clear to understand the political content of the principle of secularism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".