The Ohio State University Center for Slavic and East European Studies Newsletter (Winter 2004)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We at the Slavic Center would like to wish all of you a Happy New Year and hope that you will remain faithful on your New Year's Resolutions to stay active and involved in the OSU Slavic and East European Studies' community.We are looking forward to accomplishing the many initiatives, activities, and projects that we have planned for this grant cycle.I am happy to report that Fall Quarter 2006 saw one of our highest enrollments in courses.What is especially encouraging is that the less-commonly taught languages at OSU have seen a rise in in the number of students and the attendance at our lectures, symposia, and conferences set an all-time high.We are looking forward to hosting a number of conferences this year, including the Midwest Slavic Conference (12-14 April) for the fourth year in a row, the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Association for Women in Slavic Studies ( 26-27 April), an International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Women and War (Fall 2007), and a conference of the Association for the Study of Eastern Christianity (Fall 2007).Two volumes of the Ohio Slavic Papers have just been published: vol.6, "Proceedings of the Second Graduate Colloquium on Slavic Linguistics", reflecting the work of our graduate students in Slavic linguistics, and vol.8, "Translating Russia: From Theory to Practice", which contains papers presented at a conference organized by our Center.The Slavic Center also submitted two important proposals to the Graduate School--one which would revise and broaden the curriculum for the M.A. Program in Slavic and East European Studies, and the other which would create a dual M.A. program combing the degree
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.011 |
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 teacher head, 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".