MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400788548 · doi:10.25730/vsu.2070.24.011

Североамериканская историография Коммунистического интернационала 1990-х гг.

2024· article· en· W4400788548 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
I.A. Suzdalcev

Bibliographic record

VenueВестник гуманитарного образования · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonial History and Postcolonial Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is devoted to the analysis of the North American historiography of the Communist International of the 1990s. The choice of countries is due to the fact that a significant number of studies on the Comintern were published in the 1990s in the USA and Canada. The relevance of the research is evidenced by the fact that in this decade the study of the politics of the Comintern and national communist parties remained one of the tasks of English-speaking historians: a new conceptual approach (revisionist) to the study of this topic was established, whose representatives differed from the "traditionalists" on a number of key issues. Publications devoted both directly to this organization and to foreign communist parties, international relations of Soviet Russia, and the communist movement in individual countries have been published. This determined the purpose of the article: to summarize the publication data in one study. Results: most of the studies published in the 1990s, in which historians adhere to a traditionalist approach, are based on much earlier works, however, thanks to the opening of a number of Russian archives, archival materials began to be involved in a fairly significant number, which increased the objectivity of scientific works written, including from the positions of opposite concepts. The historiographical tradition of the Comintern, which existed until the late 1980s and early 1990s, was subjected to changes: the formation of a new revisionist approach entailed a change of emphasis and a revision of some established points of view. The authors who adhered to this concept began to rely on more modern literature (including Russian) and a wide source base, represented by materials from both foreign archives and the Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History. The author concludes that the arguments of each side are quite convincing, which is likely to affect the continuation of the scientific dispute, which will contribute to the growth of scientific publications on this topic. According to the logic of the article, the opinions of "traditionalists" and then "revisionists" are presented on each of the issues under consideration. Статья посвящена анализу североамериканской историографии Коммунистического интернационала 1990-х гг. Выбор стран обусловлен тем, что значительное количество исследований, посвященных Коминтерну, опубликованы в 1990-е гг. именно в США и Канаде. Об актуальности исследования говорит факт того, что в это десятилетие изучение политики Коминтерна и национальных коммунистических партий оставалось одной из задач англоязычных историков: утвердился новый концептуальный подход (ревизионистский) к изучению данной темы, представители которого расходились с «традиционалистами» по ряду ключевых вопросов. Увидели свет публикации, посвященные как непосредственно данной организации, так и зарубежным коммунистическим партиям, международным отношениям Советской России, коммунистическому движению в отдельных странах. Это обусловило цель статьи: обобщить данные публикации в одном исследовании. Результаты: большинство исследований, изданных в 1990-х гг., в которых историки придерживаются традиционалистского подхода, опираются на гораздо более ранние работы, однако благодаря открытию ряда российских архивов, в достаточно значительном количестве стали привлекаться архивные материалы, что повысило объективность научных трудов, написанных в том числе с позиций противоположных концепций. Историографическая традиция Коминтерна, существовавшая до конца 1980-х – начала 1990-х гг., была подвергнута изменениям: формирование нового ревизионистского подхода повлекло за собой смену акцентов и пересмотр некоторых устоявшихся точек зрения. Авторы, придерживавшиеся этой концепции, стали опираться на более современную литературу (в том числе российскую) и широкую источниковую базу, представленную материалами как зарубежных архивов, так и Российского государственного архива социально-политической истории. Автор приходит к выводам о том, что аргументы каждой из сторон достаточно убедительны, что, вероятнее всего, скажется на продолжении научного спора, что будет способствовать росту научных публикаций по данной теме. Согласно логике статьи, по каждому из рассматриваемых вопросов сначала представлены мнения «традиционалистов», затем «ревизионистов».

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.319 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 venueВестник гуманитарного образованияSame topicColonial History and Postcolonial StudiesFrench-language works237,207