Some aspects of the Caspian policy of Peter I: based on the expedition in the first quarter of the 18th century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is important to study the historical and geographical issues of the Caspian Sea, whose name underwent various changes in different periods of history due to the historical and political situation of that time. The article is written based on Russian, Kazakhstan and foreign scientific works. The purpose and objectives of the research is to study the historical significance of the expeditions organized by Peter I for the purpose of research and development of the Caspian Sea basin at the beginning of the 18th century in the collection of scientific data about the sea. Analyzing data on the history of the sea, the name of the sea; Conducting scientific analysis of the records of Russian travelers and scientists found in archive funds on the historical, geographical and economic features of the sea. The Caspian Sea and its historical and geographical issues have been the subject of historical research of many travelers, historians, geographers and scientists since ancient times. The authors make scientific conclusions by systematizing a lot of cartographic materials and data written on this issue, focusing on the expeditions organized along the Caspian Sea during the period of Peter I.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".