MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236801733 · doi:10.35120/kij29082453b

THE BULGARIAN ORTHODOX COMMUNITY IN ISTANBUL: HISTORY AND PERSPECTIVES

2018· article· en· W4236801733 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge International Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicBalkans: History, Politics, Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBulgarianTurkishPoliticsState (computer science)Independence (probability theory)Ancient historyPolitical scienceHistoryEconomic historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In comparison to the other Bulgarian colonies around the world, that of Istanbul is a special case. If one compares it with those in America, Australia and Canada, it is small in size, but an important part of the complicated Bulgarian-Turkish relationship. What makes it different are the history of its creation, the role it played during the Bulgarian National Revival and the conditions in which it found itself during the years leading to the present day.The Revival is the period when, in the capital of the Ottoman Empire, the Bulgarians consolidated themselves as an ethnic community in the name of the struggle for ecclesiastical independence. With its multiple donors and the support of the Bulgarian State, the Bulgarian Exarchate bought many properties and built Bulgarian spiritual centres on the territory of present-day Turkey—churches, schools, community centres, bookstores, and other representative buildings. According to contemporary Turkish law, the Bulgarian colony, which now numbers 500 people, cares for the few remaining buildings from the Revival era in Istanbul, with the assistance of the Bulgarian Government.By now, hardly any representatives of the Bulgarian colony remain, and it is being revived by Bulgarians, mostly from Aegean Macedonia, who have never lived inside the boundaries of the Bulgarian state.Since the First World War (from Kemal Atatürk) until now (to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan), the colony has survived within a regime of constant discrimination. The colony does not boast any distinct personalities, it does not publish any printed publications, and has no active political and social life.Its ecclesiastical status introduces additional difficulties to its representatives. As a result of historical circumstances, the focus of our ecclesiastical struggle is concentrated on the Diocese of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which even now spiritually favours the descendants of those who fought against it.Throughout the years, with different intensity, and subject to many external factors, the colony’s struggle to preserve Bulgarian national self-awareness and the Bulgarian spirit has continued to this day. The community members retain the generic memory of their Bulgarian roots and identify themselves as Bulgarians.The members of the colony were particularly tested during the period of the “Process of Rebirth” and the years of the anti-Bulgarian campaign, when they found themselves socially isolated and suffered the negative aspects of the politics of the Communist Bulgarian government.Throughout the majority of its existence, the Bulgarian community in Istanbul was hostage to contemporaneous Bulgarian-Turkish relationships. However, today it can become one of the elements for the strengthening and development of good relations between the Republics of Turkey and Bulgaria.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.289 · 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