MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390106105 · doi:10.1080/00085006.2023.2278980

Symbolic revolution on the Maidan: the case of the “iolka”

2023· article· en· W4390106105 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEastern European Communism and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSymbol (formal)DignityFLAGS registerTree (set theory)The SymbolicFrame (networking)Artifact (error)PoliticsSociologyHistoryGenealogyLawPolitical scienceLinguisticsComputer sciencePsychologyPhilosophyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is devoted to the history of one of the most famous symbols of the Revolution of Dignity – the metal frame of an artificial Christmas tree (iolka, as it was called) erected on the Maidan. The study has two purposes: on one hand, to examine the process of transforming a symbol from a verbal one to a substantive one and from something negative to something positive. This process is linked to the protesters’ creation of a new symbolic space and a new symbolic system. On the other hand, the Christmas tree structure is considered as an artifact of the Maidan, the constituent elements of which, having influenced the process of symbol formation, can be analyzed as a distinctive historical source. These elements include the flags, posters, and banners that participants in the Revolution of Dignity affixed to the frame of the Christmas tree. The study of these artifacts, some of which are stored in the National Museum of the Revolution of Dignity, provides indirect information about the protesters and their views on the socio-political processes occurring in the country.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0380.024
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Slavonic PapersSame topicEastern European Communism and ReformsFrench-language works237,207