Reports on Gubernia Supervision in the Paperwork System of the Second Quarter of the 19th Century: Materials of the Orenburg Gubernia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The article is devoted to the analysis of reports on the gubernia supervision (obozrenie) in the Russian Empire as a special type of reporting documentation, which has not been studied enough. There is comparative analysis of the supervisions of the Arkhangelsk, Vologda, and Olonets governor-general, and Olonets governors of the first quarter of the 19th century. It is concluded that they differed from the annual governor's reports and were regulated by circular law. The article attempts to trace their evolution over the second quarter of the 19th century, considering the gubernia supervision reports a kind of paperwork in the system of “general local supervision” carried out by the governor. Establishment of government inspection (reviziya) as the most important means of control over the local government occurred under Paul I. Since then, there implemented principles and mechanisms of both “higher” (Senate) and general local supervision. Supervisions, as well as Senate inspections (reviziyas), had a common program. Inspector and civil governor, when considering complaints and requests of the gubernia inhabitants, could initiate an investigation into officials’ abuses to remove them from office. The reports’ content coincided with problems of the most faithful governor's reports; the former, however, did not have an established form. As a rule, they were compiled either for structural divisions of local government, or thematically. Personality of the gubernia head, their interests and administrative experience are quite discernible in the reports. In comparison to annual reports, more attention was given to the governor's personal analysis and proposals. Gubernia supervision reports became an important channel of communication, through which the central government received the necessary information on the state of gubernia institutions and could evaluate the activities of the governors. Reports frequency, established by law, was not always respected; it varied with gubernias. In the first half of the 19th century gubernia supervision reports evolved from a variety of governor’s reporting documentation to their inclusion in annual most faithful reports. This was the result of the government policy to unify paperwork, reduce volume of interdepartmental correspondence, and expand methods of covert supervision over local government. The evolution of the gubernia supervision reports did not change their nature.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».