Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is not possible to write an account of the "Syriac Orthodox" in North America that avoids nomenclature.While the self-identification of the early immigrants in their respective native languages-Turoyo Aramaic, Turkish, Armenian, and Arabic-was straightforward for the most part, the nomenclature in English proved more problematic.Standard designations changed over time, starting with "Assyrian" in the early 1900s, moving to "Syrian" in the 1950s, and shifting to "Syriac" at the turn of the third millennium, with all three terms coexisting until the present day.The term "Syriac" in the Syriac language itself is Suryoyo.But by the end of the nineteenth century, when our history of the community in North America begins, the members of this church only used Syriac liturgically.While those from the Tur Abdin region of today's southeast Turkey-who would end up in Central Falls-spoke Aramaic natively, others who lived in Kharput and would end in the Worcester, Massachusetts, area spoke Turkish and Armenian.Residents of Diyarbakır, who immigrated to the New Jersey and New York areas, spoke Turkish.Immigrants from Mardin, who settled in Canada and some parts of New England, as well as those from Homs, who settled in Detroit, were Arabic speakers.They all self-identified with the Arabic/Turkish form Suryānī.
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 | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.054 |
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".