NEw INFORMATION ABOUT THE KURGAN BURIAL MOUND IN THE HISTORICAL PART OF MUROM ACCORDING TO THE RESULTS OF THE 2020 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
В статье освещается вопрос о расположении курганных могильников в исторической части города Мурома. По письменным источникам известны три курганных могильника, расположенных за пределами городских укреплений древнего Мурома, на расстоянии 250– 500 м от них. В ходе археологических раскопок последних десятилетий локализовано местоположение четвертого курганного могильника к юго-западу от кремля древнего города на расстоянии не менее 300 м. В процессе археологических работ 2020 г. в квартале № 38 Мурома зафиксированы и изучены части трех кольцевых ровиков древних курганов, снесенных в позднее время. По внешнему диаметру, ширине, глубине, заполнению исследованные объекты аналогичны ранее обнаруженным курганным ровикам. В яме, расположенной рядом с ровиком 1, найден целый лепной горшок, относящийся к ранней группе древнерусской керамики. Находки 2020 г. являются не только подтверждением существования четвертого курганного могильника на определенной ранее территории, но и указывают на его значительные размеры. The article highlights the issue of the location of burial mounds in the historical part of the city of Murom. Three burial mounds are known according to written sources, located outside the city fortifications of ancient Murom at a distance of 250–500 m from them. During the archaeological excavations of recent decades The location of the fourth burial mound has been localized to the southwest of the Kremlin of the ancient city at a distance of at least 300 m. During the archaeological work in 2020 parts of three ring rovers of ancient mounds demolished at a later time were recorded and studied in the quarter No. 38 of Murom. The investigated objects are similar to the previously discovered burial mounds in terms of external diameter, width, depth, and filling. A whole stucco pot belonging to the early group of ancient Russian ceramics was found in a pit located next to the rovik 1. The 2020 findings are not only the confirmation of the existence of the fourth burial mound on a previously defined territory but also the indication of its significant size.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".