MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7093720968

Археологічні джерела до вивчення етногенезу українців

2024· other· uk· W7093720968 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Scientific Issues of Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University Series pedagogy · 2024
Typeother
Languageuk
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient and Medieval Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnogenesisSlavic languagesUkrainianContext (archaeology)Ethnic groupQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of the ethnogenesis of the Ukrainian people, and especially its origins, remains one of the key issues for Ukrainian studies. It must be stated that research in this field has not yet become systematic, leaving a wide field for various speculations. The study of ethnogenesis requires a complex approach that should combine studies in archaeology, physical and cultural anthropology, ethnology, linguistics, and history. However, for the study of the early stages of the formation of the Ukrainian ethnos, archaeological sources are of key importance. In the context of the origin and early stages of the formation of Ukrainians, the materials of Slavic archaeological cultures of the early Middle Ages, known on the territory of Ukraine – Prague, Penkiv, and Kolochyn in the 5th–7th centuries are of fundamental importance, and Raikovets, Volyntsevo, and Romenska in the 8th and 10th centuries. The proposed article provides an overview and periodization of Slavic antiquities of the early Middle Ages according to modern research, highlights the role of archaeological sources in the study of ethnic processes. On the basis of written reports by early mediaeval authors, the historical and ethnic interpretation of the archaeological cultures of this era is considered. The period following the large-scale migrations of the Hunnic era (the last quarter of the 4th century–the middle of the 5th century CE) was associated with the entry of Slavic tribes into the historical arena and the appearance of the first truly Slavic archaeological cultures. In the course of the colonisation movement, the Slavic tribes developed the territory of the steppe borderland, forest steppe, and forest zone in the south of Eastern Europe, and some later settled large areas in the Danube and the Balkans, as well as in the region north of the Carpathians, reaching the confluence of the Elbe and Saale in the west. The archaeological reflection of this process was the spread of monuments of the Prague, Penkiv, Kolochyn, and Dzedzytska cultures and monuments of the Ipotesht – Kindesht – Churel types. It is these cultures that are correlated with the Antes and Sclavins of written sources. The Great Migration became a key phenomenon in the early history of the Slavs and laid the foundation for the beginning of the ethnogenesis of modern Slavic peoples, including Ukrainians.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.007

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
GenreOther

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 topicAncient and Medieval Archaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207