MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047107170 · doi:10.1080/00085006.2020.1786619

Russian Orthodox monasticism in Riga diocese, 1881–1917

2020· article· en· W3047107170 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Geopolitical and Social Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTartu Ülikool
KeywordsMonasticismAncient historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article considers the foundation of four Orthodox monasteries and convents in Riga diocese in the late nineteenth century and how these conceptually and physically transformed diocesan space through borderland rhetoric and the creation of internal and external religious and social networks. Analyzing the foundation of these institutions, their demographic profiles, their role in social outreach, and their function as loci of Orthodox religiosity in the region, it is argued that the monasteries helped turn Riga diocese from a backwater of the Church into a borderland bastion of both the faith and Russian nationality, which was given impetus by dual (and often intersecting) processes of russification and eparchial institutionalization. Despite some achievements by 1914, the First World War effectively ended the roles of the monasteries in this process, as the imperial framework of both their rhetoric and their networks collapsed under the pressure of German invasion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it