MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FUNDAMENTALS OF THE GENESIS OF RUSSIA ARCHITECTURE OF THE FIRST HALF XVIII CENTURY IN THE CONTEXT OF LEGISLATIVE REFORMS

2022· article· en· W4323338280 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Milena Zolotareva

Bibliographic record

VenueNEWS OF HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS CONSTRUCTION · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture and Art History Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatureArchitectureContext (archaeology)PeriodizationQuarter (Canadian coin)State (computer science)Urban planningPolitical sciencePower (physics)Public administrationHistoryCivil engineeringLawEngineeringArchaeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In accordance with a certain periodization of urban planning and architectural and construction activities in the context of legislative initiatives of the state and the supreme power for each of their identified stages (Petrovsky - the first quarter of the XVIII century, 1725-1741, 1741-1761), the degree of influence of reforms on urban planning and architectural and construction areas was clarified. This, in turn, it made possible to identify the most significant reforms for each of the stages that influenced the development of architectural practice. Consideration of the impact of legislative initiatives, regulation of urban planning and architectural and construction activities, the effectiveness of this regulation gives a full picture of construction and design practice in Russia during the first half of the XVIII century, and also determines the direction of the development vector ib this sphere during subsequent periods.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNEWS OF HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS CONSTRUCTIONSame topicArchitecture and Art History StudiesFrench-language works237,207