Interpretation of Historical Processes of the Epoch of Amir Temur and Temurids in the Works of Academician Bartold
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to interpretation of historical processes of the epoch of Amir Temur and Temurids in the works of Academician Vasily Bartold. It shows the degree of change in the interpretation of historical processes in the scientific heritage of the scientist due to political changes in Russia. A historiographic analysis of the most important works of the scientist dedicated to the history of the epoch of Amir Temur and Temurids shows how views of the scholar changed depending of political and national circumstances. The enormous scientific legacy of V. Bartold on the study of the epoch of Amir Temur and Temurids has not been completely investigated and published yet. The most important views of V. Bartold, scattered in various publications that have become a bibliographic rarity these days, should be reprinted with the necessary scientific commentaries in the light of the new achievements of oriental studies. All this serve to determine the contribution of the peoples of Central Asia to the world civilization in the time of Amir Temur and Temurids, especially in the fields of culture, science, architecture and fine arts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".