MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ON THE SOURCES AND DATING OF THE VYCHEGODSKO-VYMSKAIA CHRONICLE (BASED ON ARTICLES ABOUT STEPHEN OF PERM)

2025· article· ru· W7104376862 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTexts and History Journal of Philological Historical and Cultural Texts and History Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Technology and Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedactionExtant taxonPeriod (music)Quarter (Canadian coin)Middle AgesSubject (documents)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Vychegodsko-Vymskaia Chronicle contains unique information about the early history of the Komi people and the Perm lands. Early copies of this chronicle, however, have not been preserved, and its text is known only from a published copy made by P. G. Doronin in 1927. According to the preface and the afterword of this chronicle, it was written by the priests Misail and Eutychius from Ust-Vym in the period from the 1580s to 1619. The chronicle enjoys a high degree of authority in modern scholarship, and most scholars accept its dating. In 1996, A. N. Vlasov arrived at the conclusion that the chronicle text was a compilation created by Ust-Vym priests in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. According to Vlasov, it was based on various sources. One of them was the Tale of Stephen of Perm, which was introduced by Vlasov to a scholarly audience for the first time. Nevertheless, the chronicle remained a poorly studied text. Exploring the manuscript tradition of the Tale of Stephen of Perm, the author of this article argues that the source of the Vychegodsko-Vymskaia Chronicle was the derivative Extensive Redaction of the Tale of Stephen of Perm, which was probably created in the third quarter of the 18th century. This confirms Vlasov’s assumption about the late origin and the compilative nature of the extant text of the Chronicle, which calls for a critical attitude toward this source.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTexts and History Journal of Philological Historical and Cultural Texts and History StudiesSame topicMilitary Technology and StrategiesFrench-language works237,207