MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399426073 · doi:10.7202/1111897ar

Petrykivka Painting

2023· article· en· W4399426073 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnologies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCentral European and Russian historical studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaintingArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discussions about the issues of heritage and ownership of culture have become especially heated in the current political climate in Ukraine. In the process of re-writing the Soviet historical narrative and re-claiming their national and cultural identity, it is very important for Ukrainians to mark their geographical and cultural borders. Heritagization plays an extremely important role in this process. In this paper, I use the example of Petrykivka painting as a case study to illustrate the current tendencies and problems with claiming heritage. Deploying the tools of critical heritage studies, I want to explore two themes: 1) how the process of heritagization has been a political act, used both by the Soviets and in independent Ukraine, but with different agendas; and 2) the long-standing effects of such heritagization and involvement of international cultural organizations in it.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.269 · 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