Volodymyr Vynnychenko's influence on Mykola Kulish's and Valerian Pidmohylnyj's writings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Volodymyr Vynnychenko entered the Ukrainian literature in 1900s. His first short story aroused general attention among reviewers and readers. No other Ukrainian writer of the first quarter of the 20th century gained such popularity and eminence as V. Vynnychenko. During his 50-year literary career the author has gone through an evolution: from early short stories to novels, dramas; and his final writings are marked by science fiction novels, detective genre, political and philosophical novels. His writings were published in plentiful amounts. He held this sovereign position in the Ukrainian literature almost until 1933. An extensive range of thematic and genre specifications of Vynnychenko's writings influenced a great number of Ukrainian writers (e.g. Mykola Kulish and Valerian Pidmohylny), who took up his life-work and elaborated Vynnychenko's methods in a special, unique way. In his plays M. Kulish reassumes various thematic aspects of Vynnychenko's works, for instance a motif of the "Ukrainianess", the formation of the Ukrainian people, the conflict between "Russianness" and the "Ukrainianess", the society formation. However, both authors show different ways of processing these themes. Vynnychenko's writings are dominated by the psychological aspect, whereas the most important feature of Kulish's plays...
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".