Dated Muslim epigraphic monuments of the Solkhat/Kirim city and its environs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose of the study: Identification of patterns and heterogeneities in the chronological distribution of epigraphic monuments. An attempt to correlate dated material with certain events in the life of the medieval city of Solkhat/Kirim. Detection of chronological markers in the typology and design of lapidary monuments, on the basis of which it will be possible to give a chronological reference for monuments without dating. Research materials: The article contains information about more than a hundred dated epigraphic monuments with Arabic inscriptions found at different times on the territory of the Golden Horde city of Solkhat/Kirim and in its environs. The data was collected on the basis of lapidary material stored in museum and private collections, including 26 monuments that are being introduced into scientific circulation for the first time. The information mentioned in the works of Evliya Celebi, domestic researchers of the 19th to the beginning of the 20th century was taken into account, the studies of O.N. Akchokrakly, diaries and drawings of U. Bodaninsky, and photographic materials of archaeological expeditions of the 1920s. Research results: The work presents the distribution of dated monuments over the time period from the second half of the 13th century to the last quarter of the 15th century. Also presented are the results of the chronological distribution for some subtypes of grave monuments and the time frame for the use of the Turkic language on the epigraphic monuments of Solkhat/Kirim.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".