Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the article is to reveal the image of the Prince/Tsar Ferdinand in the historiography of the Russian Empire and to identify the factors that influenced the interpretation of the activities of the Bulgarian monarch. Research methodology. The concept of “image”, which is considered as a form of representations of various aspects of life and work of the Bulgarian Prince/King Ferdinand in the works of Russian historians of the late XIX – early XX centuries, was important for achieving the goal set in the work. We can consider individual images created by different researchers as well as general one which was formed under the influence of all the above-mentioned researchers. It should be noted that the representations are subjective and do not correspond to the realities of the domestic and foreign policy of the Bulgarian monarch or partially coincide with them. Main results. The author outlined the circumstances of international situation in Europe and in the Balkans in particular, which in the last quarter of the XIX and in the first twenty years of the last century determined the assessments of the domestic and foreign policy initiatives of the Bulgarian monarch Ferdinand I Coburg made by Russian historians. Other factors that influenced the interpretations of researchers, including their political views and the affiliation to a particular state institution, are also revealed in the work. The author notes the desire of the university professorship to create more neutral images of the Bulgarian prince, in contrast to the scientists involved in political battles in the interests of certain parties. Scientific novelty. The author for the first time described the image of Ferdinand I in the historiography of the Russian Empire, and also clarified the factors that determined the assessments of the Bulgarian prince activities. The type of the article: empirical.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".