QUESTION OF CONSECRATION OF COMMEMORATIVE PARTICLES AND DEBATE ON THE MOMENT OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION WHICH TOOK PLACE IN MOSCOW IN THE LAST QUARTER OF THE XVIITH CENTURY:THE ARTICLE ABOUT THE COMMEMORATIVE PARTICLES FROM THE “SCHITVERY”(“SHIELDOF FAITH”) AND “OSTEN” (“PRICKER”), EDITED FROM THE MANUSCRIPT GIM. SIN. 346, 452, 546
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Publication contains a Slavonic text of the article entitled “On the particles which are extracted at the Prothesis” edited from all the main manuscripts of the “Schit very” and “Osten”, which are theological-polemical collections, prepared after a decree of the patriarch Ioachim of Moscow, and are intended to be an official (“Schit very”) pro-found refutation of the non-orthodox opinion on the moment of Transubstantiation — as well as some other delusions contained in the printed Ukranian books of the XVIIth cen-tury (and also in the works by Moscow theologians of the period who based their con-victions on those books), which became popular in Moscow because of the joining of Ukraine to Muscovite Rus. Introduction to the text edited is devoted to the history of ap-pearance of the named text and also of different statements on the question of transub-stantiation of commemorative particles, which were expressed during the debate on the Transubstantiation which took place in Moscow in the last quarter of the XVIIth century.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".