HISTORIOGRAPHY OF YER YEDIGE EPIC IN 2ND HALF OF 19 – 1ST HALF OF 20 CC.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the 2nd half of the 19 century to the 1st half of the 20 century the articleanalyses and highlights the main stages in the study of the heroic epic Yer Yedige. The destiny of Yer Yedige epic, as well as the heroes of the epic, turned out to be full of adventures and dramatic plotlines. It is arguable that to the extent that the researchers changed the image of the hero by studying the epos and adapting it to the Soviet reality and ideology, the epos changed the fate of the scholars themselves. Due to ideological pressure, which started after the Resolution of Central Committee of All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks in 1944, scientists radically changed their scientific career and gave up the theme of Yedige epos (A.Margulan changed from philology to archeology), which in its turn had a negative impact on Yedige studies, reducing its scientific and cognitive potential up to 80s of the 20 century. In this context, the article attempts to review the history of Yedige epic studies within conceptualist and anthropological research models used in historiographical studies. In this view, for the first period of the study of the epic of Yedige (from the 2nd half of the 19 century to the pre-revolutionary period) it is more producible to be considered within a conceptualist model of historiographical research, and for the second period (next quarter of 20 cen.) within an anthropological model of research.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".