MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389356707 · doi:10.1111/russ.12583

<i>A Chto Sluchilos'?</i>: Ethnographies of Holding It Together

2023· article· en· W4389356707 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

VenueThe Russian Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisScholarshipEthnographyContext (archaeology)PoliticsSociocultural evolutionSociologyEthnic groupIndigenousOrchestrationPolitical scienceGender studiesAnthropologyLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This essay by sociocultural anthropologists of Russia working in the North American academy considers rupture in three ways. First, we review rupture as a theoretical concept that ethnographers have both used and contested in making sense of the end of the Soviet Union, to inform our reading of the present moment. Second, we think about what political and social relationships the war has made speakable and for whom, at a time when the possibilities of free expression in Russia carry novel risks. Anthropologists working with indigenous and ethnic minorities in Russia have long insisted on the country’s internal plurality. Drawing on this scholarship, we discuss the ways in which plurality has been freshly repoliticized in the context of the war in Ukraine, while carrying forward some of the legacies of its Soviet orchestration. Third, we observe that the 2022 invasion of Ukraine marks a rupture for ethnographers in the way we do fieldwork in and of Russia. In response, we call for a scholarly praxis of suturing together multiple scales of analysis, digital and geographic locations and incommensurable perspectives.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.331 · 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