MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023275904 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511496479

The Dynasty of Chernigov, 1146–1246

2003· book· en· W2023275904 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2003
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsPontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlossaryIndex (typography)Table (database)HistoryFourth generationThird generationComputer scienceLibrary scienceNatural language processingInformation retrievalDatabaseLinguisticsWorld Wide WebPhilosophyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historians in pre-revolutionary Russia, in the Soviet Union, in contemporary Russia, and in the West have consistently relegated the medieval dynasty of Chernigov to a place of minor importance in Kievan Rus'. This view was reinforced by the evidence that, after the Mongols invaded Rus' in 1237, the two branches from the House of Monomakh living in the Rostov-Suzdal' and Galicia-Volyn' regions emerged as the most powerful. However, careful examination of the chronicle accounts reporting the dynasty's history during the second half of the twelfth and the first half of the thirteenth century shows that the Ol'govichi of Chernigov successfully challenged the Monomashichi for supremacy in Rus'. Through a critical analysis of the available primary sources (such as chronicles, archaeology, coins, seals, 'graffiti' in churches, and architecture) this 2003 book attempts correct the pervading erroneous view by allocating to the Ol'govichi their rightful place in the dynastic hierarchy of Kievan Rus'.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.145 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it