Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses the creation, development, and significance of the office of Ukrainian chaplaincy in the Canadian military forces during World War II. Seven Ukrainian chaplains—three from the Ukrainian Catholic Church of Canada and four from the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada—served the approximately 32,000–35,000 military personnel. Of these, three chaplains served in England and two in Europe. The work of the chaplains is discussed as is the role of their superiors in Canada and abroad. The paper evaluates the significance of the Ukrainian chaplaincy in the military effort, as well as in the development of the post-WWII Ukrainian Canadian community. Cet article présente la création, le développement et l’importance du bureau de l’aumônerie ukrainienne dans les forces militaires canadiennes pendant la seconde guerre mondiale. Sept aumôniers ukrainiens – appartenant aux Églises ukrainiennes du Canada, dont trois catholiques et quatre orthodoxes – ont œuvré auprès d’environ 32,000–35,000 officiers et soldats. Parmi eux, trois ont servi en Angleterre et deux sur le continent européen. Nous étudions ici le travail de ces aumôniers, ainsi que le rôle de leurs supérieurs au Canada et outremer. Nous y évaluons aussi l’importance du rôle de l’aumônerie ukrainienne dans l’effort militaire, ainsi que dans le développement de la communauté canadienne ukrainienne d’après la seconde guerre mondiale.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".