LITERACY RATE IN PERM GOVERNORATE ON THE DATA FROM THE ALL-RUSSIAN POPULATION CENSUS OF 1920
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article considers the level of literacy of the inhabitants of the Perm governorate in 1920. The study is based on the materials of the All-Russian Population Census of 1920. The correlation of literate and illiterate adults aged 20-29, 30-39 and 40-49 is analyzed. For ease of comparison, the number of literate adults is given in absolute terms and in percentage terms in relation to the total number of a particular gender and age group. The calculated data are systematized in the following tables. The general patterns in the distribution of literates are revealed. Residents of cities and factory settlements had more opportunities in the field of education in the first quarter of the twentieth century. The gender identity of illiterates aged 25 to 49 was typical for traditional society: women had fewer opportunities to get an education. Educational opportunities of school-age children did not depend on gender characteristics. The level of literacy was more significant in the age group from 20 to 29 years old. There were more literate women of 20-29 years old in cities, towns and villages in absolute numbers than men of the same age. This indicates a gradual change in attitudes to education in general and to women's education in particular, which was took place in the Russian provinces in the early 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".