Koreans in the Russian Far East: Historiographical Review of Publications of the Second Half of the 20th – First Quarter of the 21st Centuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article examines the historical periods of the formation of the historiography of the history of the Far East-ern Koreans in the second half of the twentieth century – the first quarter of the twenty-first centuries. The au-thors introduce into scientific circulation the analysis of the research of Korean authors and a number of publi-cations published in the first quarter of the XIX century. The analysis of publications was carried out using the principle of historicism, the problem-chronological method and the region-oriented approach. In the historiog-raphy of the problem of Russian Koreans, three stages are distinguished: the second half of the 1950s – the first half of the 1960s; the beginning of the 1980–1990s; the 2000s to the present, each of which is character-ized by key problems that have become the subject of research in the indicated chronological period. The arti-cle examines both Russian and foreign historiography of the failed problem, provides an analysis of the most significant publications, sets the task of intensifying scientific cooperation with scientists of North and South Korea for further research of the history and activities of Russian Koreans.
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 | 0.013 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".