Orthodoxy in the perspective of the formation of compliance with legal, journalistic, scientific-historical and artistic social subcultures in the second quarter of the 19th century (according to National Corpus Of The Russian Language)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The second quarter of the XIX century became the era of the reign of Nicholas the First, when the number of texts with the lexeme “Orthodoxy,” according to the materials of the linguistic academic resource “National Corpus of the Russian Language,” exceeded their volume for the entire XVIII century. We can say about continuation of the formation of an academic tradition of objective description of confessional, ethnic, ethno-confessional and religious communities in a multi-confessional country of the Enlightenment, combined with the formation of the so-called “protective” direction in politics. In search of compensation (consent) between the court, legal, journalistic, church and scientific elites, new denotations and connotations are formed (for example, “Orthodoxy of the Greek-Russian Church”, “Christian Orthodox Catholic Faith of the Eastern Confession”, etc. in the texts of laws), a romantic understanding of “Orthodoxy” is developing as “the unanimity of the people” (I.V. Kireevsky), normative requirements for the work of writers called upon to create literary works “in the spirit of autocracy, Orthodoxy and nationality” are being constructed (N.A. Polevoy). Along with this, the importance of “inner Christian life” is recognized (V.A. Zhukovsky). The article sets out the position of social philosophy with an orientation towards the approaches of modern philosophical religious studies.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it