Solution of the Personnel Issue in the City Police of the Russian Empire at the End of the 18th – the First Qarter of the 19th Centuries: Normative and Legal Regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article analyzes the evolution of the legislation of the Russian Empire
 in the field of personnel policy in the city police of the declared period. When
 considering the degree of the problem under study, special attention is paid to
 modern historiography. The source base of the study is represented mainly by the
 legal acts of the Russian Empire at the end of the 18th – the quarter third of the
 19th centuries.
 The analysis of legal documents allowed the author to conclude that the
 dynamics of personnel policy in the field of work of city police in the late 18th –
 first quarter of the 19th centuries were aimed at strengthening public order and
 security. At the same time, the maintenance of the city police was shifted to the local authorities. A special role in the appointment of officer ranks in the city
 police was played by the Committee of August 18, 1814.
 It is noted that the following circumstances had an inhibitory effect on the
 implementation of an effective personnel policy in the field of public order.
 Firstly, the class structure of society limited the opportunities for recruiting and
 promotion of people from the unprivileged classes, which was also reflected in
 the different approaches to working with officers and lower ranks. Secondly, the
 solution to the problems of the city police was seen in increasing its staffing, and
 not in strengthening its material base, raising salaries, improving training and
 retraining of personnel.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".