From the Editorial Team: Embarking on a New Chapter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies (EWJUS) marks an important milestone in our journal's history.After seven years of Svitlana (Lana) Krys's tenure as EWJUS editor-in-chief, this issue has been prepared for publication by a new editorial team that brings together Serhiy Bilenky (the new editor-in-chief), Tania Plawuszczak-Stech (long-standing EWJUS book review editor and the new managing editor of the journal), and Marko R. Stech (Director of CIUS Press and Scholarly Publications).As we take over responsibility for the publication of a leading Englishlanguage scholarly journal in Ukrainian studies at such a momentous and dif�icult time for Ukraine and Ukrainian scholarship, we begin our remarks by thanking Svitlana Krys for her strong leadership; assistance with the journal's administrative transition; and notable accomplishments.To mention only one of her achievements, we congratulate her on the fact that effective 1 September 2021-during her tenure as editor-in-chief-EWJUS was selected for coverage in the Scopus indexing database (Elsevier's highimpact abstract and citation database).With gratitude for the past work of both Svitlana Krys and EWJUS founding editor-in-chief Oleh S. Ilnytzkyj, as well as for the rich legacy that our journal inherited from its predecessors, Journal of Ukrainian Studies and Skhid-Zakhid: Istorykokul'turolohichnyi zbirnyk (East-West: Historical-Cultural Collection [1998][1999][2000][2001][2002][2003][2004][2005][2006][2007][2008][2009]), our team is determined to build upon their accomplishments and expand on and carry them into the future.EWJUS is one of the most widely recognized scholarly journals in the �ield of Ukrainian studies in the West.Our mission is to promote and disseminate original scholarship in a variety of areas related to the study of Ukraine's past and present, and especially in the �ields of Ukrainian history, culture, language, literature, and society, in both comparative and interdisciplinary perspectives.In our work, we also strive to foster and nurture an international community of scholars who specialize in these areas of Ukrainian studies.Our current issue appears during the time of the Russian Federation's full-scale assault on Ukraine.By publishing high-quality in-
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 | 0.015 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.020 |
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".