Foster care in Bulgaria at the beginning of the XXI century – European model and national specifics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For almost a quarter of a century, foster care has been implemented in European Bulgaria as an alternative form of care for children “at risk” and “in need”. As a philosophy and strategy, as well as a program of particular actions, it was created in Europe and imported into the Bulgarian conditions ready-made. At the same time, however, in these conditions it inherited elements of sustainable traditional practices with the same purpose, which have existed for a long time in Bulgarian society – among them are foster care, guardianship and adoption as a permanent care arranged according the common and written laws; their presence in the Bulgarian culture creates the psychological preconditions and motivates the good starting position of the present-day social service “foster care”. In the course of its application in Bulgaria, it undergoes changes and adaptations to the specific conditions of Bulgarian society in the situation of a prolonged crisis. These changes must be conceptualized, argued and proven, and then successfully implemented. The scholarly analysis in the thesis is based on field research in the cities: Sofia, Lom, Vratsa, Smolyan and the region, Pernik and Plovdiv.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".