Культурные интересы современной приднестровской элиты
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cultural interests of representatives of the modern Рridnestrovie elite were examined by analyzing the answers received as part of a survey. The respondents were leaders from various fields of activity: administrative and political, education and culture, law enforcement; government officials (managers at various levels), heads of the commercial sector and public organizations.The emphasis is placed on the fact that the cultural level of the Pridnestrovian elite directly affects the support of the cultural processes of the republic, in connection with which it was of interest to analyze the forms of leisure, preferences in creativity, the degree of influence of certain relationships and connections between people on work performance, etc.The survey demonstrates that in a presidential republic like Pridnestrovie, the key role in the development of culture belongs to the president and almost 60% of respondents note his constructive activity. An assessment of the activities of various government entities in the field of cultural processes in the republic demonstrates that the work of the main executive body - the State Service for Culture and Historical Heritage of the PMR - is highly assessed by less than half of those surveyed; less than a quarter highly appreciate the work of the government and the Supreme Council.It is noted that the Pridnestrovian elite still “gravitates” to the “Soviet past”, and in a multinational republic, nationality is not a significant factor that influences career growth. The desire to realize oneself in the management field and take a worthy place in society are key positions when deciding to become a leader; material wealth is not dominant.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
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".