ТЕОРЕТИКО-МЕТОДОЛОГІЧНА СПАДЩИНА МИХАЙЛА ГРУШЕВСЬКОГО У ДЗЕРКАЛІ СУЧАСНОЇ УКРАЇНСЬКОЇ ІСТОРІОГРАФІЇ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to reconstruct the discussions that took place in modern Ukrainian historiography around the theoretical and methodological legacy of M. Hrushevsky. The research methodology involves the use of the principles of objectivity, historicism, and systematicity, as well as general scientific and special-historical methods typical for historiographical research. The scientific novelty of the article consists in an attempt to comprehensively reconstruct the historiographical discussions surrounding the theoretical and methodological legacy of M. Hrushevsky in Ukrainian historiography of the end of the 20th – the first quarter of the 21st century. Conclusions. In the end, it was noted that in modern Hrushevsky studies, the historicaltheoretical direction was quite popular among researchers. At the same time, a distinct disproportion in the study of the theoretical and methodological model of the outstanding historian is noticeable – researchers mainly focus on his historiosophy and almost completely ignore the epistemology of the study. Among the achievements of this period is the development of a wide range of issues of M. Hrushevsky’s understanding of the ontology of history. First of all, historiographers levelled the ideological and political layers present in diaspora Ukrainian studies when analyzing this problem. Also important is the consensus reached about the need to abandon the labelling of M. Hrushevsky’s concept as purely positivist. The shortcomings are related to the general underestimation of the need to study methodological issues in Ukrainian historiography. Therefore, the contextual processing of the problems of reconstruction of the integral concept of M. Hrushevsky’s historiosophy, the study of the theory of the scientist’s historical knowledge, the definition of his theoreticalmethodological model, and finally, the clarification of the impact of the historiosophical-epistemological reflections of the historian on Ukrainian socio-humanitarianism are understudied, and therefore are promising for further research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.009 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".