MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Batyrs: Historiographical Survey

2015· article· en· W2740760848 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Samal Kazizovna Kabyltaeva, Tilegen Sadykovich Sadykov, Kuralai Otaubaevna Seytkazina

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Anthropologist · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKazakhHistoriographyInstitutionFolkloreHistoryTheme (computing)Quarter (Canadian coin)SociologySocial sciencePolitical scienceAnthropologyPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper analyses the historiography of the batyr’srole in maintaining the integrity of the Kazakh state in the first quarter of the XVIII – the second half of XIX century. The researchers demonstrate the degree of study of the theme and peculiarities of approaches in the development of the institute of batyrsand its role in the unity of the Kazakh khanate. The researchers identified contemporary tendencies and directions in the study of theoretical problems of the role of batyrs as a social institute (‘institution’ should have been more appropriate) in the life of Kazakh society. Certain aspects of the problem, such as the term “batyr”, the social structure of the Kazakh society, the role of batyrs as a public institution in the life of Kazakh people. Modern Kazakh historiography is characterized by a trend away from dogmatic stereotypes, expansion of range of issues under study and attraction of oral folklore materials on the topic that interests people.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0130.022
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.202 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueThe AnthropologistSame topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207