Crisis phenomena in Central Asian direction development of Russian foreign trade in the Orenburg direction in the 1st quarter of the 19th century
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper contains analysis of development tendencies of the Russian Empire foreign trade with Central Asian khanates in the first quarter of the 19th century. The authors found that the Russian State didnt pay much attention to the Asian customs policy in this direction for a long time. It was due to the fact that the trade with Central Asian khanates was of exchange and caravan character. The author came to the conclusion that the heads of the Orenburg Region - military and civil governors - made great efforts to change that situation and made special rules for the foreign trade development in the Orenburg Region. It promoted commodity turnover increase. The author proved that in the first quarter of the 19th century the most important element of Central Asian trade development crisis in the Orenburg direction was the fact that merchants from Central Asia dominated Russian merchants in the numerical ratio. However, the ministry of finance and E.F. Kankrin refused to forbid Central Asian merchants to trade at internal Russian fairs as it would result in stagnation in trade and would make prices for goods higher. This problem for the first quarter of the 19th century couldnt be solved as it was connected with the geopolitical status quo existing in the region. It only started to get solutions with an active military advance of Russia to Central Asia in the second half of the 19th century.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it