Problems of Modern Folk and Stage Choreography: Artistic Language and Motivations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to revealing the peculiarities of the artistic language of folk-stage choreography at the beginning of the XXI century. and to determine the specifics of the use of motifs of folk dance movements in the process of modern stage interpretation of Ukrainian dance. The article considers the processes of creating signs that make traditional Ukrainian dances unique, as well as identifies the features of their use and transformation in the context of the development of modern stage folk dance. The study found that the leading, determining role in the system of heterogeneous means of artistic language of stage folk dance belongs to the authentic dance culture. This is explained by several aspects: first, the archetypal nature of the stage dance itself, which finds expression not so much in the return to the syncretism of the archaic, but in the appeal to the inexhaustible potential of artistic and aesthetic possibilities contained in any archetype; secondly, the fact that folk-stage choreography is extremely receptive to creative pursuits and bold artistic experiments. That is why even in the most difficult, crisis moments in the history of Ukrainian culture, in the moments of its transformation and transition to a new level, stage folk dance plays a special role, because against the background of complex transformations returns Ukrainian culture national spirit, and on the other the language of folk-stage dance determines the search for new forms and meanings. It is noted that authentic Ukrainian dance, whose motives come from folk beliefs, legends, myths, rituals and ceremonies, is designed to promote the national identity of the modern generation, which is an urgent problem of socio-cultural space of the early XXI century.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.057 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| 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".