Armoury Row in Tiflis from the 1630s to the 1920s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For years Tiflis used to be a major economic center of the Caucasus. Its arms were well known and valued outside the region. Arms workshops were located in different areas of Tiflis, but most of them were concentrated in Armoury Row, which, at least since the 1630s, was located in the historic district between Sioni Cathedral and Anchiskhati Basilica, in the western part of King Square. It was probably due to King Rostom that rows of arms workshops were established in the form which remained until the Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti was annexed by Russia. He moved the royal palace to the area between Sioni Cathedral and Anchiskhati Basilica and began the formation of the royal quarter. In 1795, after the troops of the Persian Shah Aga Mohammad Khan invaded Tiflis, Armoury Row was completely destroyed but was subsequently rebuilt by the Kartli-Kakheti kings. Armoury Row continued to exist in the western part of King Square until the Kartli-Kakheti kingdom was annexed by the Russian Empire. In the 1800s, various government buildings began to appear around King Square, and therefore Armoury Row was moved a few hundred meters to the south, where it existed until the first quarter of the 20th century. The study of the history of Tiflis Armoury Row allows us to supplement modern views on arms production in the Transcaucasia in the 17th-20th centuries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".