Historia wojen domowych w Polsce Alberta Viminy, w przekładzie Krzysztofa Żaboklickiego, pod redakcją, ze wstępem i komentarzami Teresy Chynczewskiej-Hennel, Instytut Badań nad Dziedzictwem Kulturowym Europy, Białystok 2017, ss. 284
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The review concerns an edition of Albert Vimina’s work History of civil wars in Poland (Historia delle guerre civili in Polonia) by Teresa Chynczewska-Hennel. The edition consists of two main parts. The first, which is an extensive introduction, was devoted mainly to the description of Albert Vimina’s biography. The second part contains The History of Civil Wars in Poland, which consists of five books on 196 pages. The main part contains descriptions of the struggles of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth with the Zaporizhian Cossacks in the years 1648-1651. The following three parts, attached to The History of Civil Wars in Poland, are also related to the author’s personal observations. As I have already mentioned, the reviewed edition is published in Poland for the first time and it has been prepared with knowledge of editorial art and in accordance with the recommendations of the publishing manual. It must be emphasized at this point that what clearly distinguishes it from the Lithuanian edition from 2012 is, above all, the excellent translation and extensive set of footnotes. In conclusion, it must be said with certainty that we have received a very successful edition and, what is worth emphasizing, not the last one in the publisher’s output.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".