Methods of the “New Division of the Empire”: The Reforms of Administrative Division in Vyatka Rеgion from Catherine the Great to Paul I
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the territorial transformations carried out in Vyatka Region in the 1780s–1810s. As is known, before the last quarter of the eighteenth century, the system of administrative-territorial division of the country was based on the historically established system of uyezds. However, in 1775–1802, two major reforms were carried out, which rebuilt the administrative-territorial division following qualitatively new principles – approximate equality of the population of provinces and uyezds and transport accessibility of administrative centres for the population. These changes largely determined the outlines of the social structure of the Russian Empire over the next century, and changes in the management system and social structure naturally attract researchers’ attention today. With the help of a detailed reconstruction (based on maps of the time, both printed, from national atlases of 1792 and 1800, and handprinted, from the collections of several archives) and comparison of the boundaries of provinces in the middle of the eighteenth century, in 1792, in 1792, 1800 and 1805–1806, the author reveals the redistribution of territories between urban centres. It transpires that the system of territorial relations in this region during the reform of Catherine II changed more decisively than in the central regions of the country, and the new borders were initially drawn without a survey of the situation on the ground, in some cases – in the form of straight lines on the map. The correction of inconveniences caused by such a manner of reform was delayed and was completed already during the administrative reforms of Paul I, which, unlike most regions, were not cancelled there in the first decade of the nineteenth 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".