MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3179437341 · doi:10.1080/00085006.2021.1915519

Reconstructing the past: narratives of Soviet occupation in Ukrainian museums

2021· article· en· W3179437341 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Valentyna Kharkhun

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute of Ukranian Studies, University of Alberta
KeywordsUkrainianNarrativeContext (archaeology)InstitutionalisationIdeologyPolitical sciencePoliticsSociologyHistoryLiteratureLawArtLinguisticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines narratives of occupation in portrayals of the Soviet past in Ukrainian museums. The paper analyzes the juridical, historical, and ideological usage of the term “Soviet occupation” in the Ukrainian context to illuminate the political and cultural circumstances that favoured the creation of Ukrainian museums of occupation. A separate section is devoted to the narrative of occupation found in the museums of other post-Soviet countries, in order to distinguish Ukrainian peculiarities. The article focuses on the Museum of Soviet Occupation and the Kyiv Occupation Museum to discuss the institutionalization of the occupation narrative within Ukraine, examining the main memory actors, dominant narratives, and visitors’ experiences in the establishment and further development of such institutions. This research reveals the essentially anti-Soviet and anti-Russian pathos of narratives of occupation in Ukrainian museums, emphasizing the ways in which they reproduce the Soviet style of history telling.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.019
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Slavonic PapersSame topicMemory, Trauma, and CommemorationFrench-language works237,207