Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of “refugee poetry” or “poetry of migrants” is quite new for both English and Ukrainian literature. However, in the modern world, the phenomenon of migration, or even forced migration, is well known and researched. It is primarily about the social, political and economic dimensions of the movement of people from one continent / region / country to another. Most often, the countries that actively accepted migrants in the 19th, 20thand 21stcentury were the USA, Canada, Australia, partly Great Britain, in fact the entire English-speaking world (we are talking about different periods and factors that do not actually constitute a separate topic of research in the present study). At the same time, there was a big layer of art, in particular poetry, which reflected the difficult topic of people displacement and further integration into new societies. For some time refugee poetry (here in after the author of the article will mainly use this term), as well as the archive of memories recorded in it, were on the margins and were not the object of a deep scientific analysis in foreign literary studies. As for Ukrainian refugee poetry, it appeared in its new dimension after an almost century-long break (we are talking about poetic texts at the end of the 19thcentury and the first half of the 20th century, which coincide with the first and second waves of migration of Ukrainians) and has also been very little researched, except for several scientific articles. The object of literary analysis of the article is the English refugee poems in comparison with the Ukrainian poetic texts that appeared after 24 February 2022 upon the full-scale invasion of the Russian occupying forces in the territory of the sovereign state Ukraine when millions of Ukrainians were forced to leave their homes and become seekers of temporary shelters. Therefore, the main goal of the article is to outline the main themes and arrays of refugee English and Ukrainian poetry in a comparative aspect, as well as to visualize the archive that correlates with the national memory of a particular people and/or the state it represents. Such a comparative analysis of two poetic dimensions has not yet been the object of literary studies in Ukraine.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".