REGIONAL INTERFAITH ASSOCIATIONS IN UKRAINE IN THE LATE ХХ – IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE XXI CENTURY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is aimed at studying the processes of formation of regional interfaith associations in the modern period of Ukraine’s history. The research methodology is based on a combination of general scientific and special historical methods and an interdisciplinary approach. The scientific novelty of the work lies in the fact that here, on the basis of a wide source, for the first time, the processes of the formation of regional interfaith associations in Ukraine in the late 20th and early 21st centuries are comprehensively considered. As a result, the authors come to the following conclusions. During the period of independence, a network of regional interfaith associations was created in Ukraine. They acted as advisory bodies of local authorities. The first regional interfaith association established in 1992 was the Interfaith Council of Crimea «Peace is a Gift of God». The active establishment of regional interdenominational associations, associated with the development of state-confessional relations, began in the mid-2000s. They became interchurch councils at local executive authorities. The next stage of the emergence of regional interfaith bodies was begun in late 2013. This was due to complex socio-political changes in Ukraine, the Russian-Ukrainian war, administrative and territorial transformations, and decentralization. Along with regional interdenominational associations under executive authorities, interdenominational associations were also formed under local governments. Relations between regional interfaith associations and local authorities have acquired a partnership character. They contributed to the optimization of church-state relations in the regions. At the same time, the regional interfaith associations mainly included Christian denominations. The activities of regional interfaith structures were actualized in the context of the full-scale Russian-Ukrainian war.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".