The Modern Tradition of Marking the Places of People’s Deaths on Highways (On the Example of the Russian Federal Highways A 151, P 178, P 241)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Хотя традиция устанавливать знаки на местах гибели людей в ДТП сравнительно недавно стала объектом исследования культурной географии, социальной антропологии, фольклористики, многие ее аспекты к настоящему времени уже достаточно хорошо изучены учеными Европы, Северной Америки, Канады, Австралии и др. Благодаря их работам установлена не только специфика этой традиции в современной социокультурной жизни общества, но и раскрыты национальные, этнические, региональные особенности. С 1990-х гг. эта традиция активно развивается и в России, однако освоение ее отечественной наукой началось только в 2010-е гг. Поэтому многие аспекты остаются пока еще малоисследованными. Среди таковых - связь традиции с особенностями дорожно-транспортной ситуации на трассах, степень развития традиции в разные периоды, типология поминальных знаков по материалу и конструкции, их региональные особенности и др. В статье на материале, полученном в результате полевых исследований 2013, 2014, 2020 и 2021 гг. на федеральных трассах, проходящих по территории трех национальных республик - Татарстана, Чувашии и Мордовии - А 151 (Шемурша - Цивильск), Р 241 (Бурундуки - Лесные Моркваши), Р 178 (Саранск - Сурское), а также изучения этих автодорог по фотографиям Гугл. Карт за 2014 и 2018 гг., освещаются особенности этой традиции на данной территории, делается попытка определить возможные пути решения некоторых из указанных проблем, а также формулируются направления ее дальнейшего исследования. Although the tradition of placing signs at places where people have died in road accidents has relatively recently become the object of research in cultural geography, social anthropology, and folklore, many aspects of it have already been well studied by scientists in Europe, North America, Canada, Australia, and others. Thanks to their works, not only the specifics of this tradition in the modern socio-cultural life of society are established, but also national, ethnic, and regional features are revealed. Since the 90s of the twentieth century, this tradition has been actively developing in Russia, but the development of its domestic science began only in the 2010s. Therefore, many aspects are still poorly understood. Among them are the connection of tradition with the peculiarities of the road traffic situation on the highways, the degree of development of tradition in different periods, the typology of memorial signs by material and design, their regional features, etc. The article uses the material obtained as a result of field research in 2013, 2014, 2020 and 2021 on the federal highways passing through the territory of three national republics - Tatarstan, Chuvashia and Mordovia - A 151 (Shemursha - Tsivilsk), R241 (Chipmunks - Lesnye Morkvashi), R178 (Saransk - Surskoye), as well as the study of these highways using photos of Google.Maps for 2014 and 2018, highlights the features of this tradition in this territory, and attempts to determine possible solutions to some of these problems, some directions of its further research are also formulated.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".