RUSSIAN ARCHEOLOGY OF THE KUZNETSK TOM’ RIVER VALLEY: HISTORY OF RESEARCH, CURRENT CONDITION AND PROSPECTS
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current paper features the research history of the Russian period archeological sites (fortified and unfortified settlements, cemeteries) on the territory of the Kuznetsk Tom’ River valley from the second quarter of XX century to the present day. Three stages of this process, which demonstrate the trend of increasing scale of Russian archeology in Western Siberia, were distinguished. The article analyzes the qualitative aspect of the research on the Russian period archeological sites. The analysis was performed on the basis of object dependency, studied by split-level methods of field archeology (reconnaissance and excavation) and type of publication (descriptive and analytical). A mapping of the Russian time archeological sites was conducted. It highlights some irregularities in their studies in the Kuznetsk Tom’ River Valley. The article points out some directions for further field research, among which: a search for new Russian settlements of XVII–XIX centuries at the estuaries of the tributaries of the Tom’ river near old stockade towns; excavation work at previously discovered old Russian villages and cemeteries and the assessment of their current state.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it