CHANGES IN TOPOGRAPHY OF THE ZHYTOMYR REGION DURING THE PERIOD OF UKRAINE’S INDEPENDENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study is to analyze changes in the toponymy of the Zhytomyr region at the end of the 20th – the first quarter of the 21st century. The methodology of scientific research is based on the use of a complex of general scientific, special historical methods and an interdisciplinary approach, tools of regional studies, regional analysis and regional personology. The scientific novelty lies in the comprehensive analysis of changes in the toponymy of the Zhytomyr region from the late 20th to the first quarter of the 21st century in the article. As a result of the conducted research, the author comes to the conclusion that decommunization and derussification of toponyms are necessary steps towards restoring the historical memory of the Ukrainian people, which is a component of the state memory policy. In the Zhytomyr region, the process of renaming toponyms (decommunization, and later derussification) began in the early 1990s and continues to this day. Since the independence of Ukraine, this has been facilitated by the developed normative-legal base and the activities of local toponymic commissions, in particular in Zhytomyr. Primarily, toponymic changes occurred within the framework of decommunization processes, which intensified after the adoption of decommunization laws by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in 2015. Mostly after the full-scale Russian military invasion of Ukraine in the Zhytomyr region, as in the country as a whole, the derussification of toponyms intensified. Mostly, the new toponymic names of the Zhytomyr region are associated with historical events or the commemoration of famous historical figures, prominent figures of science and culture, public figures who were born or worked in the Zhytomyr region; world-famous Ukrainian scientists and artists.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".