MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4380143175 · doi:10.58225/urbanizm.2017-22-12-22

HISTORICAL PREMISES OF FORMATION OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE IN CONTEMPORARY AZERBAIJAN AT THE PERIOD FROM XIX TO BEGINNING OF XX CENTURY

2017· article· en· W4380143175 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nozima Abdullayeva

Notice bibliographique

RevueUrbanizm · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHuman settlementPeriod (music)ArchitectureQuarter (Canadian coin)HistoryAncient historyCONQUESTGovernment (linguistics)ArchaeologyGeographyArt

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

At the beginning of the 19th century began a new phase in the history of Azerbaijan. The conquest of this region solved the balance of power in the traditionally Russian-Turkish-Iranian standoff. Began a planned takeover and the Division of the historical territories of Azerbaijani lands along the Araz river resulting in the Northern Khanate was annexed to Russia, and southern remained a part of the Shah’s Iran. Since this period, the administrative structure, as well as the architecture and culture of separated territories, inhabited by a people gets a different development. In the first quarter of the 19th century in Northern Azerbaijan military authorities began topographic fixing of the existing settlements on the ground. The main architectural and construction activities were carried out by military engineers directly engaged in construction of fortifications and their preparations for defense. Thus arose Zagatala, Gakh, Gusar fortresses on the basis of which were later established the towns. To strengthen borders the Tsarist Government resettled here Christian peoples who created new settlements and characteristic itself cultural environment, which in turn was reflected in the regional architecture of 19th and beginning of 20th centuries. Important for the future development of settlements was the activity engineers, architects, scientists, historians, artists coming from Russia who had studied the situation of historical cities and buildings of the region. Self-made urbanistic plans, measurements of monuments, articles, recordings and drawings became important sources for further research in this area. It should be noted that during this period clearly manifest themselves formed for centuries and enriched with new technology traditions of architectural heritage. Original constructive schemes, design patterns, shapes and architectural and decorative elements of buildings, developed over the centuries due to the mined out experience skillfully preserved and applied in the construction of various character of buildings in the regions of Azerbaijan. National architectural trends had been clearly reflected in the works of the prominent Azerbaijani architects, architects and craftsmen who left deep traces in our heritage. Despite annexation of Azerbaijani lands and rigid colonial policies of Tsarism, the process of acceding of North Azerbaijan to Russia and also played historically progressive role in its development. The continuous internecine wars between khans ended and began abolished feudal division establishing of new economic and cultural development began. This period in the development of architecture and construction of the country, despite the difficult political circumstances, was the underlying cause for further economic growth and urban development of modern Azerbaijan. In the new socio-economic conditions broke the old principles of urban planning, new techniques for urban development, and new types of public, civil, industrial, and religious buildings revealed. With the growth and changing composition of the population there has been interference with traditional and new imported Western culture. The historical heritage of the period of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries, has today a great importance in the forming of architecture of the cities of modern Azerbaijan.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,912
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,383

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,235
Écart entre enseignants0,177 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUrbanizmMême sujetAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and HistoryTravaux en français237 207