Were the historical Oirats “Western Mongols”? An examination of their uniqueness in relation to the Mongols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article examine la singularité des Oïrats par rapport aux Mongols pour reconsidérer la pratique consistant à les désigner comme des “Mongols occidentaux”. Les Oïrats, qui ne faisaient pas partie des Mongols originels menés par Gengis Khan, sont devenus, après l’éclatement de l’empire mongol, les Dörben Oïrat, une confédération nomade principalement composée de groupes non-mongols. Les tests ADN portant sur le chromosome Y des Kalmouks et des Mongols modernes montrent que ceux-ci ont des origines hétérogènes. Les Oïrats, bien qu’ils se considèrent comme un peuple mongolique, considéraient les Mongols comme une entité distincte. De même, les Mongols voyaient les Oïrats comme des ennemis étrangers (qari daysun). Les histoires chinggiside et timouride d’Asie centrale font également la différence entre les deux. Par conséquent, je suggère que les historiens reconnaissent les Oïrats comme un peuple distinct, comme les Xiongnu, les Xianbei, les Kök Turcs, les Ouïghours et les Kirghizes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".