Bibliographic record
Abstract
On Monday, the World Anti-Doping Agency released an independent report it commissioned to investigate allegations of widespread, state-sponsored doping in Russian sport. The report, prepared by Canadian sports law expert Richard McLaren, concluded "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the Russian government orchestrated an extensive program of athlete doping and cover-ups in at least 30 sports. The agency and the leaders of several national anti-doping organizations, including Travis Tygart of the United States Anti-Doping Agency, have called on the International Olympic Committee to ban all Russian athletes from the upcoming Summer Games in Rio de Janeiro. While the IOC has banned nations from participating in the Olympic Games for political reasons, such as with South Africa due to apartheid, no nation has been banned for reasons relating to sport. Yet such a ban on Russia would seem consistent with the Olympic Charter, which states that among the fundamental values of Olympism are "respect for fundamental ethical principles." These principles clearly were absent from Russia's understanding of the Olympic values, as the McLaren report documented its "Disappearing Positive Methodology" – the way in which officials manipulated athlete samples to ensure they beat drug tests. The IOC is set to decide whether to ban Russia from the Rio Olympics in the coming days. In the meantime, the IOC has imposed sanctions, including ordering a full investigation of all Russian athletes who participated in the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014 and a ban on all Russian sports ministry officials from the Rio Games.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".