MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7016234950

Богородичні міракули у «Казанях приданых до книги Ключ разумѣнія» та «Небѣ новому» Йоаникія Ґалятовського: діахронічний аспект

2024· article· en· W7016234950 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Scientific Issues of Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University Series pedagogy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary, Security, and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiracleStyle (visual arts)Minor (academic)NarrativePeriod (music)PopularityWriting styleReflexive pronounCollationQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper traces the publication history of The Miracles of the Mother of God, compiled by Yoanykiy Galyatovskyi (1688) and printed in the editions of Kazania prydanyie do knyhy Kliuch razuminiia (Kyiv, 1660) and Nebo novoie (first published in Lviv, 1665), focusing on diachronic aspects such as editing, authorial changes, and publisher’s amendments.Nebo novoie, a collection of Marian miracle tales, belongs to the Miracula genre, which gained popularity in early modern Ukraine. This edition is based on the miracles Galyatovskyi included at the end of Kazania prydanyie under the title «Some Wonders of the Blessed Virgin Mary», which originally numbered 95 miracles, with 8 omitted from the later collection.The volume of Nebo novoie significantly surpasses that of previously published texts; among the 457 miracles in its second edition, over 80 percent are new narrative units. Thus, Nebo novoie stands as an original publication in which Galyatovskyi incorporates elements of his earlier work. This self-repetition is characteristic of Galyatovskyi՚s style but can also be observed in the works of his contemporaries who attended Kyiv-Mohyla College.Textual analysis shows that the miracles from Kazania prydani, reprinted in Nebo novoie, underwent minor edits that did not affect their overall scope or content. These changes could have been made either by the author himself or by the typographers during the book’s preparation for publication. The printers’ revisions likely included orthographic adjustments and minor stylistic edits, resulting in slight textual shortening or, conversely, small additions to the narratives.It is assumed that certain insertions or updates, such as references to sources, were made by the author himself. Moreover, Galyatovskyi is thought to have made more substantial modifications, specifically in the systematic organization of the miracles, grouping them into chapters according to established criteria. This structural development was likely intended to enhance readers’ navigation within the book, aided using graphic elements such as headings, capital letters, and decorative inlays.Thus, the research highlights the evolution of the author’s work over time. In Nebo novoie, Galyatovskyi revisits and refines previously published narrative units (miracles), with particular attention to their organization and presentation.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Scientific Issues of Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University Series pedagogySame topicMilitary, Security, and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207