Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper attempts to consider how the relationship between the central government and the peripheral areas had changed in the 18th-century Russian Empire, focusing on the local top-level governors selected among the Baltic Germans from the Baltic coastal region newly annexed by Russia because of the Great Northern War (1700–21). In the first half and the third quarter of the 18th century, the highest-ranking officials in the central government or non-Russians who arrived from abroad were generally appointed to such administrators as the governors-generals and the governors. But after the local administrative reform by Catherine II, especially after the 1780s on the Baltic coastal regions which were then reorganized into the several jurisdictions of the governors-generals, more and more Baltic Germans were appointed as the top governors in their homelands. Among them, at first, those members of the Baltic-German military households, whose military merits were appreciated by the central government and who achieved remarkable social elevation, showed a high percentage. However, since the end of the 18th century, these posts had gradually been replaced by civilian officials who gained certain experience through the administrative services in their native areas. At the same time, we should pay attention to the fact that some of both military and civil servants who had been once appointed as the local governors were recalled to the central organs. Therefore, although the new tendency towards using the native civilian Baltic-Germans might result from the more and more consideration of the Imperial government for the uniqueness and independence of the Baltic coastal regions, for verifying this hypothesis, it is necessary to further investigate the specific activities of these regional administrators and their relations with the local population.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".