In search of the lost: Lituanistica of the first quarter of the 20th century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Библиотека журнала "Филологические науки" Все подробности в разделе "Книжная полка" You are here Home » Archive » 2021 In search of the lost: Lituanistica of the first quarter of the 20th century Правка P.A. Ambrosovich, V.N. Bazylev UDC 811.172 https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.5-21.137 Ambrosovich Peter A., Member of the Belarusian Public and Cultural Partnership (St. Petersburg) e-mail: ambrasovitsh@mail.ru Bazylev Vladimir N., Doctor of Philology, Professor, National Research University “Higher School of Economics” e-mail: v-bazylev@inbox.ru The article is devoted to the historiography of the post-revolutionary linguistics in Russia: research on lithuanistics, restoration of forgotten names of those Russian scientists who contributed to the development of Lithuanian linguistics in the first quarter of the XX century. In this context, we are interested in the activities of the little-mentioned and almost forgotten researcher Nikolai Sokolov (1875–1923), a full member of the Lithuanian Scientific Society since June 27, 1912. N. Sokolov’s scientific legacy is very fragmentary. So, today we can talk only about the reconstruction of his activities in Lithuania, for which the authors used in their study receiving Sokolov’s self-description of his own work , based on three variants of the list of “Lithuanian” (i.e. in the Lithuanian language and about Lithuania) publications: N. Sokolov’s letter to Nikolai Durnovo, dated 6 November 1918, N. Sokolov’s сurriculum vitae from 1909 and 1921, and obituary written upon N. Sokolov’s death, by N. Durnovo from June 2, 1923.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".