MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200849046 · doi:10.32370/ia_2021_09_16

Specificity of M. Novak's Activity in the Context of the Development of Ukrainian Film Production in the Countries of North America

2021· article· en· W3200849046 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lesya Turchak

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Historical and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianDiasporaContext (archaeology)Movie theaterEmigrationSociologyPolitical scienceGender studiesHistoryLawArt historyArchaeologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article examines the film production activities of one of the leading figures of socio-political and cultural life of the Ukrainian community in New York and Los Angeles in the mid-twentieth century. The activity of M. Novak in the context of the attempt to develop the Ukrainian film industry in order to outline the national identity is studied. The peculiarities of M. Novak’s professional and public activity in the context of the specifics of the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada and the USA are revealed and his contribution to the Ukrainian film industry abroad is clarified. The study found that the common semantic and stylistic basis of films of the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada and the United States in the 20-60's of the twentieth century. became the baggage of Ukrainian culture of their creators, the traditions of domestic cinema, in which they worked before emigrating, as well as the general attitude to the preservation of traditions of Ukrainian culture of the diaspora in North America, typical of the second wave of emigration in general. Through his own activities in the field of film production and distribution of documentary and feature films, M. Novak contributed to the nation-building dialogue and the actualization of the communicative efficiency of world Ukrainians.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntellectual ArchiveSame topicFrench Historical and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207