Anthology of Russian natural legal thought. vol. 3. The Russian natural legal thought in the first half of the twentieth century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the third volume of the anthology contains the proposed evaluation of philosophical and legal views, but also presented entirely or in fragments of works by outstanding Russian scholars I. A. Pokrovsky, I. V. Michael, P. G. Vinogradov, F. V. Taran, A. S. Yashchenko, written or published in the first quarter of the twentieth century. Their authors belong to a generation of proponents of natural law in Russia who had to experience all the hardships of the revolution, the civil war and long years of exile. Many of them did not have a chance to once again see their Homeland, but they were not broken in spirit, remained patriots showed exceptional creativity, their works has greatly enriched the Russian natural legal thought and made a worthy contribution to the Golden Fund of Russian legal science. Their names for many years was unjustly put to almost complete oblivion, and works properly is still not understood and not appreciated. The present publication is intended to promote the "return" to their names. The edition is addressed to students, graduate students, University professors and anyone interested in the history of Russian legal thought.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.008 |
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".