MOĞOL MUCİZESİ: XIII. YÜZYIL KAYNAKLARINA GÖRE MOĞOL İSTİLASININ BAŞARILI OLMASININ NEDENLERİ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Mongol invasion is the name of a medieval phenomenon that affected most of the Asian continent and a part of the European continent throughout the 13th century. It caused radical changes in the social, economic, political, and religious structures in the region it affected. The invasion, which started in the first quarter of the 13th century, reached its peak towards the end of the same century and left its place in a period of relative peace by the 14th century. In the sources of the 13th century, there was uncertainty and confusion about the first periods of the Mongolian invasion, but this situation was left to sociological analyzes with the acceleration of diplomatic initiatives over time. Similarly, the perception that the invasion is the manifestation of a divine will have left its place to the efforts to reveal the reasons behind the success of the Mongols. The global scale of the invasion constitutes a unique example in terms of comparing how the event was viewed in the historiography of the 13th century. In our study, we investigate the reasons behind the success of the Mongol invasion through the eyes of historians of the 13th century
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".