MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402402358 · doi:10.22215/cjers.v17i1.4409

Misreading Russia

2024· article· en· W4402402358 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Leigh Sarty

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of European and Russian Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussia and Soviet political economy
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key part of the contemporary Russia challenge is the West’s tendency to misread that country, both its capacity for reform and the West’s own impact on the choices that have shaped its trajectory. Excess faith in the power of the market and the applicability of social science theories skewed Western policy toward Russia in the 1990s, fuelling the xenophobic and nationalistic narratives that laid the foundations of Putinism. Misreading Russia’s historical insecurities after the collapse of the USSR ensured that US triumphalism would play badly in Moscow, contributing to the toxic environment in which Putin ultimately opted to invade Ukraine. None of this justifies the recent excesses of the Putin regime, but it does help to make them intelligible. Appreciating how the West has misread and mismanaged Russia in the past should contribute to more realistic and more effective approaches in the future. La Russie incomprise Un élément capital de l’« énigme russe » repose dans la tendance occidentale à mal interpréter la Russie, tant dans sa capacité pour la réforme que dans l’impact que l’Occident lui-même a pu avoir sur les décisions qui ont déterminé sa trajectoire. Durant les années 1990, une foi excessive en le pouvoir de l’économie de marché et en l’application des théories des sciences sociales a biaisé la politique occidentale vis-à-vis de la Russie, alimentant les courants xénophobes et nationalistes qui sont à la source du poutinisme. L’incompréhension des insécurités historiques de la Russie après la chute de l’URSS a fait en sorte que le triomphalisme américain a été mal reçu à Moscou, ce qui a contribué à la création de l’environnement toxique qui entourait Poutine et a, ultimement, participé à l’invasion russe de l’Ukraine. Rien de cela ne justifie les récents excès du régime de Poutine, mais cela permet de les rendre plus intelligibles. Décortiquer comment l’Occident a échoué à comprendre et à gérer le cas de la Russie par le passé devrait permettre d’établir des approches plus réalistes et efficaces pour le futur.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of European and Russian StudiesSame topicRussia and Soviet political economyFrench-language works237,207