Bibliographic record
Abstract
В статье вводится в научный оборот ранее неизвестная запись о событиях 9 июня 7049 (1541) г., когда, по словам источника, «основан бысть славный град Великие Лукы». Она читается среди дополнительных текстов Псалтыри с восследованием ОР РГБ. Ф. 247 (Собрание Рогожского кладбища). № 485 (середины – третьей четверти XVI в.). «Основанье», а точнее, поновление деревянной крепости происходило в присутствии ряда лиц, для одних из которых новонайденный источник служит дополнением к биографиям, для других является единственным упоминанием. Уникально для первой половины XVI в. упоминание великолукских городовых приказчиков. Особое внимание привлекает «мастер городовой» Борис Катеринин – вероятный предок или родственник Ильи Катеринина, строившего крепости в Ельце и Воронеже в 1590-х гг. The paper introduces into scientific circulation a previously unknown record of the events of June 9, 7049 (1541), when, according to the source, “the glorious city of Velikiye Luki was founded.” It is read among the additional texts of the Followed Psalter from the Russian State Library, manuscript collection of the Rogozhskoye cemetery, № 485 (mid-third quarter of the 16th century). The “foundation,” or rather the renovation of the wooden fortress, took place in the presence of a number of people, with the newly discovered source serving as an addition to the biographies of some of them, and the only mention for others. The mention of Velikiye Luki city clerks (“gorodovyye prikazchiki”) is unique for the first half of the 16th century. Particular attention is drawn to the “master gorodovoy” (fortress builder) Boris Katerinin, a probable ancestor or relative of Ilya Katerinin, who built fortresses in Yelets and Voronezh in the 1590s.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.006 |
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".