Religion, State, Society and Identity in Transition: Ukraine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
State-society-identity relations could be defined as interaction(s) between state institutions, societal groups and individuals living within the borders of a (political) community/ state. These relations are never static, but vibrant, being in constant transition under the influence of cultural, religious and other developmental processes happening in individual and in society. Within the democratic structures the relation between state, society and individual is more open-minded placing the protection of citizens, preservation of citizens’ rights, freedoms, and responsibilities as a departing point of dialogue taking in the perspective of the citizens’ cultural, religious, and ethnic affiliations and backgrounds. Within totalitarian structures this relation is hindered and is not fully developed. The present publication addresses the transition in religion-state-societyidentity relations in Ukraine within the three-dimensional approach focusing on transdisciplinary perspectives on (1) political protests, (2) civil movements and/or (3) revolution of dignity. Can the current events in Ukraine be defined mainly as political protests, i.e. a transition in state structure? Or more as civil movements, i.e. transition in society? Or is it a revolution of dignity, i.e. a transition in/of religion? An international group of researchers and experts from universities in Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Russia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and the United States of America have offered their perspective on the events in Ukraine in attempting to equip the reader with a glimpse of understanding of what happens in Ukraine and what consequences could be expected. Fair recognition of the events happening in Ukraine at the present time is already a first step towards reconciliation in the future.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".