Stage costume in the cultural space of Transcarpathia in the 20th and first quarter of the 21st century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was devoted to the consideration of stage costume in the cultural space of Transcarpathia in the 20th and 21st centuries. Until 2024, scholars had not studied Transcarpathian stage costumes. This scientific topic remains poorly studied, and issues related to the art of theatrical costume are poorly developed, most publications only briefly touch on this topic. The purpose of the study was to investigate and systematise stage costume in the works of Transcarpathian artists, to consider the origins and dynamics of its development in the culture of Transcarpathia in the 20th – first quarter of the 21st century. The research methodology was based on the use of dialectical, analytical, cultural, historical, biographical and generalising methods. The influence of the Transcarpathian stage costume on the development of theatrical culture was analysed. After all, a costume in the theater is more than a costume. It is an integral element of the theatrical environment. Throughout its history, the stage costume, characterised by simplicity and utmost precision, has contributed to the disclosure of the stage image of characters, their inner world, past and future, and to the preservation and enrichment of the cultural experience of mankind. Each of the artists mentioned in the article wrote their names in golden letters in the history of Transcarpathian theater culture thanks to their hard work, talent, and education. Researchers working on the issue of Transcarpathian stage costumes could only rely on publications and other general sources as of September 2024. The results of research can be used to write generalised works on the history of culture and the history of Transcarpathian theatre, as well as to prepare scientific seminars, lectures and advanced training courses
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".