Reclaiming the Personal: Oral History in Post-Socialist Europe. Ed. Natalia Khanenko-Friesen and Gelinada Grinchenko. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015. 328 pages.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The last few decades in humanities and social sciences revealed that scholars tend to work interdisciplinarily, emphasizing on the value of holistic approaches while researching societies and human interactions.This volume is framed as interdisciplinary research, gathering writings of oral historians, cultural anthropologists and sociologists.Therefore, it will be of interest to a wide scholarly audience.Cultural anthropology and oral history share two important features.Theoretically each discipline aims to make voicelessness vocal, in other words, to give voices to those who are absent from history textbooks and whose lives don't fit in current national projects and political ideologies.Neither oral historians nor cultural anthropologists are interested in revealing the "true" or "objective" past.Instead they deal with people's personal interpretations of the past.Methodologically both disciplines use the method of interviewing to record a person's narration, documenting people's 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".