MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412524928 · doi:10.1080/00085006.2025.2501470

Orthodox social ethics in contemporary Ukrainian wartime icons

2025· article· en· W4412524928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lidiya Lozova

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEastern European Communism and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines unconventional icons and icon-like works that paradoxically combine iconography with visual references to the ongoing Russian war against Ukraine. Ukraine’s wartime iconography reveals the conflicting socio-ethical frameworks of the Ecumenical and Moscow Patriarchates. The primary social teachings of these contrasting frameworks are briefly examined and contextualized within contemporary Orthodox social ethics in Ukraine. Special attention is paid to ethical divergences related to war, peace, and violence. Official social teachings, while never fully reflecting or informing a “lived religion,” nonetheless shape people’s attitudes and behaviours, including artistic expression. Icons are a normative part of Orthodox and Greek Catholic culture in Ukraine. An overview of Orthodoxy’s general theology of the icon, which is shared by Greek Catholics, precedes an analysis of socio-ethical messages that can be decoded from icons across time and space. Contemporary war-related Ukrainian icons and works incorporating recognizable iconographic motifs from the two socio-ethical frameworks are analyzed as expressive of a specific Orthodox social ethos and broader religious culture in Ukraine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.027
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Slavonic PapersSame topicEastern European Communism and ReformsFrench-language works237,207