MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206233248 · doi:10.32786/2071-9485-2020-02-39

MODERN PROBLEMS OF CONCEPTUAL AND TERMINOLOGICAL APPARATUS IN THE FIELD OF LAND RECLAMATION

2020· article· en· W4206233248 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenuePROCEEDINGS of Nizhnevolzhskiy agrouniversity complex science and higher vocational education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Socio-Economic Development Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand reclamationField (mathematics)Computer scienceArchitectural engineeringGeographyEngineeringArchaeologyMathematicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction.The «terminological crisis» in the field of land reclamation is long overdue.It consists in the widespread penetration of foreign terms into the Russian language, the replacement of Russian words with foreign synonyms.This situation is observed not only in colloquial speech, but also in regulatory documents.In this regard, the aim of the study is to assess and establish the possibility, appropriateness and legitimacy of the use of the term synonym «irrigation» instead of «Irrigation» in the field of land reclamation.Object.The object of research is the synonymous terms "irrigation" and "irrigation", used in reclamation activities.Materials and methods.The research methodology was based on general scientific (analysis, synthesis, generalization, deduction, induction and historical method) and private-scientific (formally legal, comparative legal, method of legal modeling and interpretation of law) methods of cognition.The empirical basis of the study included the provisions of regulatory documents, terminological dictionaries, scientific articles published in periodicals.Results and conclusions.The analysis of various regulatory documents revealed that the uncertainty and inaccuracy, and, consequently, the misunderstanding of the use of certain terms, now leads to their ambiguous (ambiguous) interpretation in law enforcement practice, and this in turn leads to legal problems and causes discrepancies between specialists when considering the same issue or solving the same problem.The reasons for the widespread use of the term «irrigation» in the countries of Central Asia, the USA, Canada, China, and India are considered.The necessity of legal protection of the Russian language as the state language in Russia is established.The provisions of the Federal Law «On Land Reclamation» are given, which enshrined the basic terms and their definitions in the field of land reclamation.Existing synonyms for the terms «irrigation» and «irrigation» are analyzed.It is concluded that it is inadmissible to borrow a foreign term instead of the Russian language that is available and understandable to the citizens of the country and the need to develop a single regulatory document governing terminology in the field of land reclamation, or a system of such documents.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.235 · 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