MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412930528 · doi:10.1080/00085006.2025.2500199

Identity transformations of Ukrainian Jewry during the Russian–Ukrainian war: Odesa’s communities and religious leaders at home and in exile

2025· article· en· W4412930528 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marina Sapritsky-Nahum

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSoviet and Russian History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsUkrainianIdentity (music)Political scienceGender studiesSociologyArtAestheticsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Russia’s extended war on Ukraine has profoundly affected the country’s religious communities, institutions, and congregational networks. These networks were built on deep historical, cultural, and familial ties across the region. Most literature on identity transformations during the war has focused on the macro-level analysis of Ukraine’s majority populations and the relationship between Russian and Ukrainian cultural and linguistic elements in the rise of civic Ukrainian identity. This article expands this discussion by examining the experiences of Ukraine’s Jewish ethnoreligious minority as well as the roles of its community organizations and religious leaders in shaping attitudes and orientations towards emerging identities. It argues that the war has triggered a multidirectional process of identity transformation, and it challenges it conventional understandings of belonging in wartime Ukraine and in communities of the displaced. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork and interviews conducted virtually and in the field, primarily with Jews from Odesa, the author shows how Jews at home and in exile have come to position themselves as more and more Ukrainian while at the same time deepening their Jewish identity through active participation in Jewish communal life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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 topicSoviet and Russian HistoryFrench-language works237,207