MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396733256 · doi:10.3167/hrrh.2024.500207

Russians at the Gates

2024· article· en· W4396733256 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Denise J. Youngblood

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Reflections/Réflexions Historiques · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussia and Soviet political economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article analyzes two recent streaming series—the third season of Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan (Prime, USA, 2022) and the limited series Treason (Netflix, UK, 2022)—as aspects of “Cold War II,” the increasingly common term for the resurgence of anti-Russian attitudes and stereotypes in Anglophone cinema and television that has been apparent since 2010. These two series reflect a shared fear of Russians and offer interesting and illuminating points of comparison, especially regarding their definitions of the threat (internal or external), the battleground (at home or abroad), and strategies for confronting the enemy (shoot ’em up or run and hide). At the same time, these series reflect different national concerns, with Jack Ryan 3 as one of many US-produced spy thrillers that trumpet aggressive, offensive action in a way that deflects attention from the country's serious divisions and protracted domestic crises. Treason, on the other hand, engages with British concerns over corruption in the UK's police and security services. Finally, the series’ differing treatments of the relationship of the not-so-distant past to present dangers (real and perceived) is also noteworthy, if puzzling; the demise of the Soviet Union is central to the crisis in Jack Ryan 3 but only glancingly mentioned in Treason.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical Reflections/Réflexions HistoriquesSame topicRussia and Soviet political economyFrench-language works237,207