Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the first half of the thirteenth century when the Tatars invaded Rus‘, Novgorod, like Kiev, was not the patrimony of any dynasty of princes. The town‘s citizens had fought resolutely for its political independence, and defended that status jealously after they had secured it. In this way Novgorod was different from another major principalities, that were patrimonial domains of different princely dynasties. This article deals with earlу political history of relations of Novgorod and its princes. Author argues that the Novgorodians invited the Varangian prince Riurik to rule them with the intention of making the town his permanent principality. And from the middle of the tenth to the first half of the twelfth century, the office of the prince of Novgorod was not analogous to that of a posadnik. A prince was not a temporary appointee to Novgorod like a posadnik, but ruled the town as his patrimonial domain. Most often he was the eldest son of a princely family. Ultimately, it was the princes‘ unwillingness to rule Novgorod as their patrimonial domain that forced the Novgorodians to stop searching for a hereditary dynasty for their town.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".