Ukrainian interwar immigration to Canada in foreign historiography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to characterize the publications of diaspora and foreign scientists who studied the history of Ukrainian immigration to Canada in 1918-1939. Methods of source-study heuristics and criticism, interpretation, verification, systematization for the research, selection, description, evaluation and classification of historiographical sources are used in the work. The issue of resettlement movements has worried foreign researchers, as Canada is a country of immigrants. However, the topic of historiography of Ukrainian immigration has rarely been singled out in studies in Canada. The reasons for the lack of research on this issue are difficult to explain. Isolated works of domestic and diaspora scholars are now obsolete because they do not take into account the achievements of recent decades. The analysis of Soviet historians, as a product of work in a totalitarian state, is biased and contains ideological clichйs. All these confirm the scientific novelty of the article. Conclusions. Scientists have collected and processed a large array of facts from the history of immigration. The main part of researches on Ukrainian immigration in the interwar years is the publications of diaspora scientists and to a lesser extent foreign ones. They shed light on the process of integrating Ukrainians into Canada's polyethnic society and their social status. A significant place is occupied by works related to the process of immigration of Ukrainians, in particular, they cover the reasons, nature and composition of the second wave of resettlement. However, some issues on the history of immigration, which were briefly covered in the pages of generalizations, have not yet been thoroughly addressed in special studies. Foreign scientists have devoted separate articles on Ukrainian immigration, rather than comprehensive researches. A feature of diaspora studies about Ukrainians in Canada is their detachment from the history of Canada itself. Canadian historians, although considering immigration processes in the context of national history, do not pay due attention to the problem of forming of the Ukrainian diaspora.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".