MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2565908598

Становление отношений Российской империи с регионом Персидского залива

2015· article· ru· W2565908598 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Никонов Олег Александрович

Bibliographic record

VenueЛокус: люди, общество, культуры, смыслы · 2015
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsEmpireElitePersianPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)Balance (ability)Quarter (Canadian coin)EconomyPower (physics)Economic historyHistoryEconomicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is dedicated to the first initiatives of the Russian government directed to the formation of political and commercial relations with the Persian Gulf region. The role of Imperial consulates in Bagdad and Basra in stimulating of mutual profitable relations between trade and industrial elite of the Russian Empire and Arab markets is described. Special attention is devoted to the English policy contradicting initiatives of the Russian structures. The author points out that not only objective problems connected with the remoteness of the region to the Empire didn’t allow it to realize its plans but it was mainly political interests that demanded to keep good relations between Russia and Great Britain. Nevertheless, the strengthening of Russia’s presence including military demonstrations in the Persian Gulf in the last quarter of the 19th the beginning of the 20th centuries led to the change of political power balance and signing the Russian-English agreement of 1907 of juridical partition of the “influence spheres” in the East.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.018

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueЛокус: люди, общество, культуры, смыслыSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207