MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Regional Differences in the Ottoman-Controlled Middle Danube Area in the Sixteenth Century: New Research Possibilities

2025· article· en· W4416366489 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miklós Fóti, Dino Mujadžević, Eva Simon

Bibliographic record

VenueHungarian Studies Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCentral European and Russian historical studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSection (typography)Middle EastState (computer science)Middle AgesKingdomRegional studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article approaches the possibilities of researching regional demographic and economic differences in the Ottoman-controlled areas of the medieval Hungarian Kingdom proper in two very different settings. First, it provides research options on sixteenth-century dually ruled Hungary in the southeastern area between the Drava and the Danube. This region was the Habsburg-Ottoman border zone in this period. The second section of the article focuses on case studies of the subprovinces of Požega and Szeged and the possibilities of their comparison. Both of these sanjaks were positioned in the interior of Ottoman territory and shared similarities, but they were also very different in certain aspects, particularly the presence of Muslims. The data for this article is provided by several Hungarian and, to a more considerable extent, Ottoman surveys, which are to a large degree digitized. The authors use the data on settlements, population, landholding, and state income from taxes preserved in these sources to provide various indicators that can outline the possibilities for further research.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.311
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.112 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHungarian Studies ReviewSame topicCentral European and Russian historical studiesFrench-language works237,207