Pavel Grigorievich Mizhuev in the Communicative Space of N. I. Kareev
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Автор реконструирует коммуникативные связи между двумя историками – Павлом Григорьевичем Мижуевым и Николаем Ивановичем Кареевым. Мижуев, ученый второго ряда на фоне мэтра, не являвшийся полноправным членом профессиональной корпорации дореволюционных историков, вошел в нее в качестве преподавателя трех факультетов Петроградского университета после Революции. Мижуев был последователем умеренно-либеральной и позитивистской школы Кареева, еще в дореволюционный период создавший цельную картину разных сторон жизни Великобритании и доминионов в их исторической динамике, колониальной политики Англии, издавший первую в России историю США, Канады, Австралии и Новой Зеландии. И хотя имя Мижуева не появляется в воспоминаниях Кареева, он, хоть и скромно, но присутствовал в его коммуникативном пространстве, например, приняв участие в проектах, которые курировал Кареев, – в серии книг «История Европы по эпохам и странам в Средние века и Новое время», в «Новом энциклопедическом словаре» Брокгауза и Ефрона, а также публикуясь с ним в одних изданиях и работая в течение пяти лет на одной кафедре и факультете. The author reconstructs the communication links between two historians – Pavel Grigori-evich Mizuev and Nikolai Ivanovich Kareev. Mizhuev, a second-tier scientist against the background of the master, who was not a full-fledged member of the professional corporation of pre-revolutionary historians, entered it as a teacher in three faculties of Petrograd University after the Revolution. Mizhuev was a follower of the moderately liberal and positivist school of Kareev, who back in the pre-revolutionary period created an integral picture of different aspects of the life of Great Britain and the dominions in their historical dynamics, the colonial policy of England, and published the first history of the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand in Russia. And although the name of Mizuev does not appear in Kareev's memoirs, he, albeit modestly, was present in his communicative space, for example, taking part in projects supervised by Kareev, in the series of books «History of Europe by Era and Countries in the Middle Ages and New time» in the «New Encyclopedic Dictionary» of Brockhaus and Efron, as well as publishing with him in the same editions and working for five years at the same department and faculty.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".