The Northern war (1700-1721) in modern Russian textbooks for the higher school
Bibliographic record
Abstract
© Serials Publications.Relevance of the studied problem is caused by the need of improvement of history of Russia textbooks for university students. The purpose of article is to characterize factual and ideological contents of Northern war parts (1700-1721) in modern Russian textbooks for the higher schools. The leading approaches in research are the problem and thematic and comparative approaches which allowed to differentiate the chosen problem on some key subjects and to carry out comparison of their contents in textbooks for the higher school and in the newest monographs of the Russian historians who study Northern war. The main results of the research are that the informational incompleteness of sections of the Russian textbooks which light Northern war is revealed. The ideological orientation of the contents of textbooks is opened. Lag of the actual contents and estimated judgments in textbooks from achievements of a modern Russian historiography is proved. Need of addition of textbooks materials is proved by the facts of a humane orientation. Materials of article can be useful to teaching history of foreign policy of Russia in the first quarter of the XVIII century, the history of Russia in XVIII century.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".