Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper is dedicated to the 100 th anniversary of the establishment of a network of state archives in Russia. The author states that one of the achievements of the Russian archivists from the early 20 th century is at the same time the greatest theoretical achievement of the world archival science in the last century. The theory of Unified State Archival Fund appears in response to the new tasks of historical archives around the world in respect of the immense amount of emerging documents, their extreme diversity in type, mode of creation and use, the rapid development of social sciences. The comprehensive coverage of historically valuable documentation for its preservation for future generations (regardless of the type, author, creator and owner of the information, the technique of fixing and using it) appears to be the most easily achievable in Soviet Russia and in the countries similar to her in terms of organization, but it is a task for all other countries. The article mentions statements about the positives of overall and integrate centralization of the archives, made by many prominent representatives of world archival theory and practice. Throughout the 20 th Century, there actually was an exchange of ideas and positive practices in this respect, regardless of the economic and political differences between countries. Particularly impressive are the successes of the archivists in Canada, where the quest is for archives that are even been called «total” but which, unfortunately, forgetting their predecessors are presented as a theoretical novelty.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".