The Contribution of the Ukrainian Diaspora to the Formation of Canadian Multiculturalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the author aims to define the place and role of representatives of the Ukrainian ethnic group in Canada in the development of such a phenomenon as Canadian multiculturalism. It is well known that Canada's population consists of virtually all races and peoples. Over the centuries, immigrants from Europe, Asia, and Africa have joined the indigenous population. The first Europeans who appeared in what is now Canada were searching for new lands for the rulers of their countries, gaining wealth and fame for themselves. As they moved into the interior of the country, they came into conflict with the indigenous population, displacing them from their native places, destroying their way of life and taking their property. These were mostly the British, other natives of the British Isles, and the French. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, they were joined by other immigrants, including representatives of all European nations, including Ukrainians. In addition to Europeans, immigrants from other continents also came to Canada. Arriving in Canada, the new immigrants had already found a state in the form of a British dominion, rich in abundant natural resources and unlimited land for agriculture. New settlers were involved in the economic, political, and social development of the country. Given the multicultural composition of the population, as well as the desire of ethnic groups, including the Ukrainian one, the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism in 1969 recommended a process of integration instead of assimilation of ethnic and cultural communities into Canadian society.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".