50 years of the Helsinki process and the 30th anniversary of the Budapest “guarantees”: The prospects for a new world order
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 1st of August 2025 was the 50th anniversary of the signing in Helsinki (Republic of Finland), which was a landmark event in the political and security history not only of the European continent but also of the entire world, initiating the Helsinki Process and a system of international principles of coexistence. For decades to come, the rules and norms of behaviour in all spheres of human activity (international politics and military-political security, economy, environment and practical cooperation between countries and organisations, humanitarian sphere and human and minority rights in the broadest sense of these concepts) and the obligations of countries to each other and within international organisations throughout the European region were defined. The signing of this document was preceded by several years of negotiations by hundreds of diplomats, politicians and leaders from 35 countries in Europe, the USSR, the US and Canada. During the Cold War, which had been going on for more than a quarter of a century, the principal negotiators were the USSR and the USA, as well as their partner countries and satellites, which did not determine the content of the documents concluded, but played the role of stakeholders and ardent supporters of their patrons, the two main great powers, the geopolitical poles of the global bipolar system of international relations at that time. The main negotiating motivation of the USSR and its Eastern European satellites was to ensure their territorial integrity and legal fixation of the borders formed after the World War II
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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".