PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL EXPERIMENTS IN HIGH-SOCIETY SALOONS OF THE LAST DECADE OF 18TH — FIRST QUARTER OF 19TH CENTURY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical and chemical experiments attract attention as bright and unusual shows. Pedagogues and museum specialists explore them as a motivating element to awake interest to study the subject. History of enlightening shows roots to the first years of St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences and the Kunstkamera functioning. Gradually growing fashion came to its peak to the last decade of the 18th century and got its visualization as a series of popular books addressed to wide circle of readers. These editions revealed the secrets of different entertainments based on the modern knowledge of scientific laws. Until now literature of this kind was not used as a historical source. It provides the opportunity to have a new view on the processes of enlightenment and education in Russian society. The earlier books are characterized as the closeset to the idea of science popularization, later − as tending to pure entertainment, the ones in the middle − as the richest with the information of practical significance. The development of the genre went the way of social-request satisfaction, that meant entertainment with the least possible dull explanations. The analogue with modern processes of popular educational projects development is quite obvious, but modern state of wide-society interests is even advantageous for realizing the ideas of enlightenment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".