Historiography of the Neolithic Trans-Urals: the Kozlov and Poludenskaya Cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper concerns the analysis of the history of the study of the Kozlov and Poludenskaya Neolithic Cul-tures. The territory of distribution of these archaeological cultures from the end of the 7th to the third quarter of the 5th millennium BC encompassed the forest Trans-Urals and the southern taiga zone of Western Siberia, as well as the adjacent northern edge of the forest-steppe. The source base of the research is represented by a critical analysis of scientific publications touching upon the problems of the Neolithic period in the Trans-Urals, primarily those addressing the functioning of the Kozlov and Poludenskaya Cultures, since the appearance of the first sci-entific concepts to the present day. Three stages in the history of the study of the analyzed cultures have been identified. Although the first artifacts of the Neolithic era are known in the region since as early as the 1830s–1860s, the beginning of the development of first scientific concepts about the Neolithic period of the Trans-Urals (the first stage) is associated with publications of V.N. Chernetsov and O.N. Bader at the turn of the 1860s–1870s. These researchers contemplated the development of the Trans-Ural Neolithic period within the framework of a single East-Urals culture in three successive stages. V.N. Chernetsov introduced the concept of “the Kozlov phase” into scientific discourse as the early stage, followed by the Yuryinsko-Gorbunovskaya and Chestyyag phases. O.N. Bader retained the name of the early stage as the Kozlov stage, but replaced the designation of the other two with the terms “Poludenskaya” and “Sosnovoostrovskaya” stages. A milestone in the historiography of the Neolithic period in the Trans-Urals was the monograph by V.T. Kovaleva published in 1989. Therein is intro-duced a new, fundamentally different from its predecessors, concept of the development of the Neolithic in the region. The researcher abandoned the view of the cultural unity of the Neolithic period in the Trans-Urals and substantiated two lines of development that had emerged already at the early stage — the Koshkino and Kozlov groups of archaeological sites — and which continued in the Late Neolithic as the Boborykino and Poludenskaya Cultures. Since then, the main ideas of V.T. Kovaleva's concept have been developing, or have been fundamen-tally revised on the basis of new sources compiled by the scientists.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".