OLD RUS HOARD OF 2017 FROM THE OUTSKIRTS OF PEREIASLAV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article analyses the history of the discovery of hoards of the 11th—13th centuries in the Pereiaslav city and its vicinity. It is customary to consider that their list has been contained until recently only four hoards found in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: Pereiaslav (1884), Vitovtsi (1898), Pereiaslav (1912), Denysy (1912). For most of the twentieth — early twenty first centuries, no case of the hoard finding was officially recorded. But according to unofficial information such finds has indeed taken place. In 2017 the hoard of silver women’s adornment was accidentally found on a plowed field near Pereiaslav. The location of the find is at the low hill 40 meters from the left bank of the Alta river and 3.5 kilometers from the Annalistic Pereiaslav. In 2019 the hoard was transferred to the collection of the National Historical and Ethnographic Reserve «Pereiaslav». The hoard consists of 30 items: 2 temple rings, 4 lunulae, 6 beads, 7 coin pendants (cupic dirhams), 2 bracelets, 2 finger rings, 3 belt plates and 4 plaques. All items of the hoard dated to the 10th—11th centuries. The hoard was hidden, apparently, at the end of the 11th century. It significantly differs from all hoards used to be found in Pereiaslav Region. This is the set of personal adornment of one noble woman from Pereiaslav. The items allow you to ascertain the standard set of jewelry of a wealthy woman who did not belong to the princely rank. The hoard was hidden in the moment of danger but the owner never could take it back.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".