К ВОПРОСУ О СПЕЦИАЛЬНОМ ЯЗЫКЕ ЛАТЕНТНОГО ВАРВАРСТВА НА ПРИМЕРЕ ЭМБЛЕМ НАЦИОНАЛИСТИЧЕСКИХ ОРГАНИЗАЦИЙ В РОССИИ 1990‑2019 ГОДОВ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Статья посвящена изучению эмблем современных русских националистических организаций, в том числе возникших во времена СССР. Автор рассматривает основные тенденции в их эмблематике. Часть идеологов националистических организаций создавала эмблематику своих организаций с нуля в форме модных политических и коммерческих логотипов. Другие праворадикальные организации обратились к псевдорунической неонацистской эмблематике, основанной на символике III Рейха. А иные — к псевдославянской эмблематике, используя в качестве эмблем фрагментированные обереги. Некоторые националистические организации доходят до абсурда, сочетая советскую и национал-социалистическую символику. Ряд националистических организаций обратились к неоязычеству, формируя новую веру. В статье предложены пути противодействия националистической пропаганде. The article is devoted to the study of emblems of modern Russian nationalist organizations, including those that arose during the Soviet era. The author considers the main trends in their emblems. Some ideologists of nationalist organizations created the emblems of their organizations from zero in the form of fashionable political and commercial logos. Other right-wing organizations turned to pseudo-runic neo-Nazi emblems based on the symbols of the Third Reich. Still others go to the pseudo-Slavonic emblems, using for this fragmented amulets. Some nationalist organizations reach the point of absurdity, combining Soviet and National Socialist symbols. A number of nationalist organizations turned to neopaganism, forming a new faith. The article suggests ways to counter nationalist propaganda.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.012 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".