Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: During the winter of 2013–2014, hundreds of thousands protested in Kyiv against the regime of Viktor Yanukovych. As a result of the clashes with police, over one hundred civil protesters lost their lives, and hundreds were wounded by the troops loyal to the president, who eventually had to run away from Ukraine. Those events, which have been branded as “the revolution of dignity,” are unthinkable without the presence of the churches at the Maidan—the central square of the Ukrainian capital. Any picture of the Maidan missing the churches would be incomplete and incorrect. The Maidan was not only a political and social event, but also a religious phenomenon. It explained itself in religious terms and articulated its demands through religious symbols. More importantly and less obviously, it created a new matrix of relationship between the churches and society in Ukraine. This article explores some aspects of the new matrix. The role of the Ukrainian churches in creating a new model of their relationship with the public square, which was shaped by the Maidan, is rather passive. Most churches failed to fit religious expectations of the Maidan. Reactions of some of them are still inadequate to the social awakening of the Ukrainian people: instead of embracing the changes that the Maidan brought to Ukrainian society, they closed themselves in self-imposed ghettos, and preserved in those ghettos the pre-Maidan ethos. The churches received and still receive the Maidan and its outcomes differently. Their differentiation in this regard widens the existing gap between them. New strategies of rapprochement of the churches with the Ukrainian public square and between each other should be elaborated. This article concludes with suggestions for such new strategies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".