Rola mniejszości wyznaniowych w rozwoju gospodarczym Mazowsza Północno-Wschodniego do powstania listopadowego
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the economic history of Northern Mazovia from the end of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the second half of the 18th century) to the outbreak of the November Uprising (1830). Initially, this region had a relatively uniform religious and national structure. Jews, residing primarily in villages, played a significant economic role, although their number in the extensive Ostrołęka parish was still minimal As for "non-Catholics" (as Protestants, or rather Lutherans, were known), only one family lived within the parish. The situation changed after the partitions – the Prussian authorities initiated a colonization program for the German population and allowed Jews to settle in former royal towns. This resulted in the arrival of more than a dozen German families and a significant number of Jews in the towns (according to the 1817 census, there were 338 Jews in the entire parish). The authorities of the Kingdom of Poland continued the policy of bringing in German colonists, but this time for economic reasons. There were even plans to create a "factory settlement" to house the imported factory workers. However, the plans proved overly ambitious – only two "factory families" moved into the 10 two-family houses that had been built. Taking Ostrołęka as an example, we can observe the increasing participation of Jews and German Evangelicals in the urban economy. Just before the outbreak of the November Uprising, they constituted 30.5% and 6.36%, respectively, of all "Professionals," a term used to refer to all non-agricultural residents of Ostrołęka and surrounding towns. In the following decades, this picture changed even further.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".