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
В статье рассматриваются основные направления выполненных по инициативе Петра I реформ в отечественной артиллерии в первой четверти XVIII века - организация артиллерии и развитие материальной части. Анализируются основные конструктивные особенности артиллерийских орудий, применявшихся в период Северной войны. Сделан вывод о значении традиции, продолжающейся со времён правления Петра Великого, - постоянно совершенствовать материальную часть артиллерии. Обращено внимание на высокие достижения в создании артиллерийских орудий, боевых машин и ракетных комплексов в XX столетии выдающихся конструкторов - учёных и выпускников Ленинградского военно-механического института. We look at the main directions of the reforms initiated by Peter I in the Russian artillery in the first quarter of the XVIII century concerning the organization of the artillery and the development of the materiel. The main design features of the artillery guns used during the Northern War are analyzed. The conclusion is made about the significance of the tradition since the reign of Peter the Great to constantly improve the materiel of the artillery. We pay attention to the great achievements of researchers and graduates of the Leningrad Military Mechanical Institute in making artillery guns, combat vehicles and missile systems in the XX 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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 it