MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Language of Ukrainian Apocrypha as a Cultural Code

2022· article· en· W4313266703 on OpenAlexaff
Solomiia Y. Pavlovska

Bibliographic record

VenueAlmanac Culture and Contemporaneity · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary, Security, and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianApocryphaReinterpretationChronotopeSociologyLinguisticsLiteraturePhilosophyAestheticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the article is to reveal the communicative aspect of apocrypha recoding in the field of Ukrainian culture. The research methodology. According to the research strategy, a set of general scientific methods and methods of linguistic cultural studies have been used in the work. The conceptual methodological core of the study is the dialogical method, through which the connection of the apocryphal code with the code of a particular culture is analysed; the process of reinterpretation of Ukrainian apocryphal literature is investigated in the chronotope. Scientific novelty. For the first time it was scientifically proved that the Ukrainian Apocrypha is an open system oriented to the dialogue of cultures with different codes, one of the forms of coding, which allows to identify a particular cultural slice, intertext, which integrates an invariant complex of texts based on church dogmas, as well as a variant text complex, determined by the conditions of social life in a particular time period. Conclusions. The reserach is devoted to the communicative aspect of the language of the Ukrainian Apocrypha as a cultural code. The hypothesis of the Apocrypha as an intertext has been put forward and verified.The algorithm of Ukrainian apocrypha encoding dynamics in the chronotope has been traced. The concept of the East-West dichotomy in the linguistic modeling and storylines of Ukrainian apocrypha has been developed and the factors of this dichotomy have been determined. Key words: apocrypha, cultural code, invariance, variability, communication, reinterpretation.

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 score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.304 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlmanac Culture and ContemporaneitySame topicMilitary, Security, and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207