Reception of Dostojevskiy`s religious - philosophic ideas into literary works of Latvian philosophers and theologists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bakalaura darbā “Dostojevska reliģiski filozofisko ideju recepcija latviešu filozofu un teologu darbos” tiek salīdzināti un analizēti Zentas Mauriņas un Alberta Freija pētījumi par izcilā krievu rakstnieka un psiholoģiskās prozas meistara Fjodora Dostojevska daiļradē sastopamajām reliģiski filozofiskajām idejām. Viņu pētījumu uzmanības centrā ir tādi F.Dostojevskim tuvi jēdzieni kā Dievs, nemirstība un cilvēks, kā arī paša F.Dostojevska pasaules redzējums. Pirmajā nodaļā tiek aplūkotas latviešu rakstnieces Z. Mauriņas domas par krievu lielmeistara reliģiskajām un filozofiskām idejām, kā arī kritika par F.Dostojevskim veltīto monogrāfiju. Otrajā nodaļā tiek skatīta un analizēta latviešu teologa A.Freija disertācija par F.Dostojevska reliģijas problēmām.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".