MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Topographic Descriptions of the Lower Volga Region as a Milestone in the History of Scientific Studies of the Territory: the 1770s - early 1800s

2018· article· en· W6944898510 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Socio-Economic Development Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilestoneVolga regionGovernorWork (physics)DozenQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article studies the history of creation and contents of topographic descriptions of the Lower Volga Region written in the 1770s - early 1800s. Topographic descriptions are a special form of scientific works aiming to comprehensively analyze the geography, natural surroundings, history and economy of a single governorate or province. In the last quarter of the 18th century, several dozen topographic descriptions of various Russian provinces and governorates were written. In the course of our research, four similar works dedicated to the Lower Volga region were discovered, namely: Introduction to Astrakhan Topography by the first correspondent of the Russian Academy of Sciences P. I. Rychkov; Description of Saratov Vicegerency by Saratov Governor I. I. Polivanov; Historical and Topographical Description of Saratov Province written under the editorship of Saratov Governor P. U. Belyakov; and The Economic Description of Astrakhan and Caucasian Governorates by Astrakhan official I. V. Rovinsky. Creation of a topographic description required purposeful large-scale work in terms of empirical data collection. In this connection, P. I. Rychkov failed to complete work on his topographical description and, thus, limited himself to publishing an Introduction to Astrakhan Topography. I. I. Polivanov who worked on the description of Saratov Vicegerency in the early 1780s was probably able to collect more materials but, however, only a short version of his work was published, while other collected materials were not preserved. Saratov Governor P. U. Belyakov and Astrakhan official I. V. Rovinsky were able to complete their works on topographic descriptions. As distinguished from earlier works about the Lower Volga Region, their compositions were largely based on local sources of information - documents, annals, historical legends of local inhabitants. Provincial officials who had to write detailed works devoted to their territories had to use such sources for the first time, since they had limited opportunities to work with scientific literature in Astrakhan and Saratov. The use of a wide range of sources, high level of erudition of the authors allowed them to create unique encyclopedic scientific works depicting the Lower Volga Region. The authors not only collected huge empirical data but offered some original critical interpretation. For the first time ever and on a high professional level, the topographic descriptions analyzed lots of issues related to the history, current state and prospects for the development of the region. Not all topographic descriptions were published. One of the most interesting composition containing topographical and historical descriptions created under the editorship of Saratov Governor P. U. Belyakov was sent to Moscow and St. Petersburg. In Saratov, the manuscript of this work was not preserved and remained unknown to local researchers until the 1920s. In view of the mentioned difficulties, the topographic descriptions had no serious impact on the development of scientific thought in the Lower Volga Region. Unfortunately, the data collected in topographic descriptions, recommendations for the development of the region made by the authors on the basis of their analysis were not applied in practice by the state bodies of the region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.393
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.142 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicRegional Socio-Economic Development TrendsFrench-language works237,207