Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article presents an analysis of 140 random lexemes of Greek and Latin origin excerpted from Słownik kieszonkowy polsko-rosyjski i rosyjsko-polski [Pocket Polish-Russian and Russian-Polish Dictionary] edited by I. Mitronova, G. Sinicyna and G. Lipkes. The corpus is, according to lexicographers and linguists, an effect of mutual influences of Polish and Russian languages. The opinions on origins of words differ among researchers, and the article attempts to verify the previously accepted judgements by M. Vasmer, W. Witkowski and Z. Rysiewicz, based on informations included in monographs by D. Moszyńska, H. Leeming, S. Kochman, and in historical dictionaries of both languages. With reference to almost 75% of the analysed material, the direction of loanword acquisition proposed by Vasmer, Witkowski and Rysiewicz has been confirmed. However, for about a quarter of the random sample of words, the accepted opinion is not confirmed by more recent historical dictionaries, nor by the lexical material provided in the monographs. The article proposes new results for the direction of loanword migration in this group of vocabulary.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".