On the old archive of the Lăpușna County Court and on its 2345 documents from the 15th–19th centuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On July 10, 1926, the First-President of the Lăpușna Court, judge Eugen Ionescu-Dârzeu and the regional manager of the Romanian Archives, L. T. Boga, signed the acceptance protocol for the old archive of the Lăpușna Court, which comprised around 2,345 documents. During the inventorying process, L. T. Boga and the archivists in Kishinev typed several copies of an opis, of which one (copy No. 3)—which I feature here—ended up in the collections of the Romanian Academy Library, probably from the archive of judge E. Ionescu-Dârzeu. Currently, this collection was integrated to Fund 220 within the Kishinev Archives. Following a global appraisal of the documents published from this archive, I may state that around a quarter of them (approximately 500) were edited, mainly by L. T. Boga and by the editors of the collection Moldova în epoca feudalismului. It is the responsibility of present or future researchers to edit integrally or as abstracts, on a theme-based or chronology-based approach, other documents within this collection. Until the fulfilment of this desideratum, the critical editing of this opis introduces in the scientific circuit around 2,000 documents, as abstracts. This important archival work tool comprises unpublished information about the history of Moldova, mostly of the regions left from the Pruth River, before and after 1812, concerning both the political and social history and the local history, the toponymy or the genealogy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.009 |
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".