Bibliographic record
Abstract
Byzantine Cherson, the Empire’s main outpost in the northern Black Sea area, was located in the south-western tip of the Crimean Peninsula. This article addresses new names of this city and, later, its ruins, which appeared from the fourteenth to eighteenth century. According to the written sources, the final decline and depopulation of this city dates to the middle or the third quarter of the fifteenth century. However, before that the Turks who lived in the vicinity called the city Sary-Kermen, or “Yellow fort.” From them, this place-name came first to Arabic writers and then to Western European travellers and cartographers. Later on, new names of the city appeared. In the seventeenth century, the sources documented the place-name Tope-Tarkan, or “Prince’s hill,” and in the eighteenth century, Church, or corrupted Χερσών. Obviously, these toponyms were in use simultaneously. In this period, Christian writers continued to call the city Cherson, but often forget the exact place where it stood. This situation reflected the changes in ethnic and language environment in the Taurica resulted by the thirteenth-century Mongol invasion and fifteenth-century Ottoman conquest, as well as the fact that the local residents forget the history of Cherson after a time its last residents left the city. Legends developed around the abandoned place, and the old ruins on the opposite (eastern) side of present-day Karantinnaia bay were probably called the city of Salunia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; 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".