Main aspects of external church relations of UAOC in the 90’s. XX century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the article of Viktoria Zaporozhets «Main aspects of external church relations of UAOC in the 90’s. XX century» from the religious-scientific point of view is carried out a comprehensive analysis of the institutionalization of the UAOC in the 90's of the twentieth century in the context of her external-church relation. It is noted that inter-church relations of the UAOC during the specified period of her existence can be characterized as two-vector (internal Orthodox and intra-Orthodox). It is emphasized that the first vector is due to the processes of interaction between the UAOC and the UOC-KP and the UOC that took place at the canonical councils / sessions of commissions, and the second vector is related to the fact that the UAOC tried to gain the canonical status of the Ecumenical Patriarch through the diocese of Canada and the United States. At the same time it is noted that although there were diplomatic inter-Orthodox relations of the UAOC, nevertheless there were temple seizures from each other. It is proved that the church-state relations of the UAOC in this period can be characterized as stable, since it was granted the right to perform services and own property, to open Sunday schools, to freely serve services in the Ukrainian language, although sometimes it was possible to find a negative attitude to this religious organization from the side of power.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".