Uwarunkowania rozwoju stosunków finansowo-kredytowych krajów bloku radzieckiego z Zachodem w latach 80. XX wieku
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Economic relations between Comecon countries led by the Soviet Union (communist bloc) and OECD countries (Western Europe, the USA, Canada and Japan) in the 1980s were characterized by deep stagnation in all areas of mutual cooperation. This was due to many negative factors interconnected in a short time. They were very diverse in terms of nature, range and durability of impact. The article contains an analysis of the development of the financial and credit relations of the Soviet bloc countries with the West in the 1980s in the existing political and economic conditions of East-West relations. The financial and credit dependence of the socialist countries was very clear and intense at that time. Its elimination or reduction as a result of the development of connections in other directions was only partially possible. Its negative impact also covered areas vital for individual economies. In addition, it was of a long-term nature, which made this type of dependence useful as an economic instrument for political purposes, both in the aspect of short-term and long-term pressure on the implementation of political intentions. When analyzing the entirety of East-West economic contacts, one cannot omit the problem of the debt of the Comecon countries, which largely determines the development of all areas of cooperation. In the 1980s, in Comecon-OECD credit relations, two trends clearly intersected: negative and positive. A negative trend was manifested in the increase in debt burdening the economies of many Central and Eastern European countries. This was caused by an increase in payment liabilities for servicing debts resulting from the postponement of loan repayment dates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.007 |
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".