MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7007114335

Антоніна Горохович як дослідниця афористики Лесі Українки

2019· article· uk· W7007114335 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Volyn National University Institutional Repository · 2019
Typearticle
Languageuk
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary, Security, and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoeticsFocus (optics)PreferenceSketchWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Проаналізовано монографію Антоніни Горохович «Поетика \nЛесі Українки і її афоризми» (Вінніпег, 1980), систематизовано \nпогляди інших учених на це дослідження. З’ясовано основну тезу \nпраці А. Горохович та критично осмислено її аргументування. \nДослідницьку концепцію простежено за розділами монографії. \nЗазначено, що в першому розділі А. Горохович проаналізувала \nприроду творчого таланту Лесі Українки та з’ясувала зв’язок між \nфілософічністю проблематики і тяжінням поетеси до жанру \nдраматичної поеми, до гострого діалогу, до афористичної мови. У \nдругому розділі дослідниця класифікувала афоризми та \nзапропонувала їх філософську інтерпретацію. У третьому розділі \nА. Горохович простежила важливу роль афоризмів у драмати-\nзації ідей, поділилася міркуваннями про поетичність афоризмів. \nУ четвертому розділі проаналізовано форму афоризмів, їх \nсемантичне багатство. Зроблено висновок, що праця \nА. Горохович, попри деякі недоліки, стала суттєвим кроком в \nосмисленні творчого феномену Лесі Українки. The article analyzes the monograph "Lesia Ukrainka’s Poetics and \nHer Aphorisms" by Antonina Horokhovych (Winnipeg, 1980) and \nprovides a systematized outline of other scholars’ views on this study. \nThe main thesis of A. Horokhovich’s work is in the focus of \nelucidation, and her arguments are critically considered. The research \nconcept is traced through all the chapters of the monograph. In the \nfirst chapter, A. Horokhovych analyzes the nature of the creative \nphenomenon of Lesia Ukrainka and reveals the interconnection \nbetween the philosophy of the topics and the poet’s preference for \nthe genre of the dramatic poem, the captivating dialogue and the \naphoristic language. In the second chapter, the researcher classifies \naphorisms and offers their philosophical interpretation. In the third \nchapter, A. Horokhovych traced the importance of aphorisms for the \ndramatization of the ideas, shared her thoughts about the poetic \nnature of Lesia Ukrainka’s aphorisms. The fourth section analyzes the \nform of aphorisms, their semantic richness. The key findings of the \nstudy prove that A. Horokhovych’s monograph, despite some \nshortcomings, has become a significant step on the way of \ncomprehending the creative phenomenon of Lesia Ukrainka.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronic Volyn National University Institutional RepositorySame topicMilitary, Security, and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207