Питання прo Східну Галичину в парламентських дебатах Великобританії на початку 1920-х років
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article on the basis of the analysis of the digitized editions of the official records of debates in the British Parliament and with the involvement of published and archival documents from English and Polish foreign ministries, English journalism and other sources the cases of Eastern Galicia status question appearance on the agenda of the House of Commons of the British Parliament in the early 1920-ies the are analyzed. It is shown that the content of the speeches on this issue was closely connected with the criticism expressed by the opposition-minded MPs to the government in the relation to the British policy in the Eastern European region, namely in connection with the undefined status of Eastern Galicia, transferred during the Peace conference in Paris under the Polish occupation, but not included in the Polish state. This situation has actualized the issue of compliance in the region of the right of Ukrainians to plebiscite. It was revealed that the awareness of parliamentarians in this matter is connected with the periodic statement of the League of Nations, including representatives of Canada, where a significant number of Ukrainian population lived, as well as with the information activities of a number of public organizations that raised the issue of the Jewish population situation. Economic interest is also noted as an incentive to raise questions on the Eastern Galician problem. It is established that the emergence of the Eastern Galician issue in the context of criticism of the policy of the British government, stimulated the latter to search for an acceptable formula for its solution: as a condition of the transfer of this region to Poland, the requirement of providing evidence of ensuring its autonomy within the Polish state was set.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
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".