Bibliographic record
Abstract
Статья посвящена теме взаимодействия Рима и провинций в период Поздней республики. В частности, автор рассматривает вопросы управления и коррупции. Материал источников убеждает нас в том, что управление провинциями в конце эпохи Республики было не столько государственным, сколько частным делом представителей римской правящей элиты, наделённых, в сущности, неограниченными властными полномочиями. Такая ситуация порождала, с одной стороны, практически полное бесправие провинциалов, а с другой — разнообразные злоупотребления, произвол и беззакония со стороны римских должностных лиц и публиканов. Главная проблема в отношениях Рима с провинциями заключалась в отсутствии чувства ответственности за судьбы покорённых народов. Это чувство появилось у римской правящей элиты лишь в самом конце эпохи Республики. This article is devoted to the theme of interaction between Rome and provinces during the period of the Late Republic. Particularly the author considers issues of government and corruption. The material of our historical sources convinces us that the provincial government in the end of the epoch of the Republic was not so much public case as private one, which was realized by the representatives of the Roman ruling class, who in fact were endowed by unlimited powers. Such situation generated, on the one hand, practically absolute powerlessness of provincials and different abusements, arbitrariness and lawlessness, which were made by the Roman officials and publicans, on the other. The main problem in the sphere of relations between Rome and its provinces was rooted in the absence of the sense of responsibility for the fates of conquered peoples. Such a sense emerged inside the Roman ruling class only in the very end of the epoch of the Republic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.006 |
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".