Preliminary Results of the Research Into the Sites of the Xianbei Period in the Kazakh Altai
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is devoted to the preliminary results of the study of the materials obtained during the excavations on the territory of the Kazakh Altai archaeological complex of the Xianbei period at the Berel burial ground. Aft er the fall of the Hunnic Empire, the nomadic association of Xianbei, known from Chinese written sources, had a huge infl uence on the appearance of the archaeological cultures of Altai. For the fi rst time in Altai, archaeological material concerning this polyethnic community was obtained in the last quarter of the last century. However, for a long time, archaeologists could not identify the Xianbei site from other numerous excavated archaeological sites. For the purpose of detailed cultural and chronological identifi cation, Chinese materials were used, which made it possible to bring the problem of identifying Xianbei sites to a qualitatively new level. On the territory of the Kazakh Altai, the period of intensive study of the Xianbei circle of sites began in 2015, when a series of new funeral and memorial structures was opened. These studies allowed not only expanding the boundaries of this community and, but also putting forward the thesis about the large-scale penetration of the Xianbei in the 3rd–4th centuries AD into the territory under consideration.
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 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 | 0.023 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it