Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Cet article envisage le débat concernant le regroupement des Indiens en villages (réductions au Pérou,congregacionesen Nouvelle-Espagne) dans l’Amérique espagnole coloniale. Plutôt qu’une stratégie visant à l’extraction des ressources, cette politique correspond à une représentation selon laquelle ceux qui vivaient sans enracinement communautaire étaient une menace sociale, car ils vivaient sans roi, ni religion, ni terre. Et leur conduite, alléguait-on, était à l’origine d’un environnement physique lui-même dangereux. Une telle association entre espace sauvage et vie hors communauté opérait de la même manière en Castille, et, en Amérique, était appliquée aux Espagnols, aux métis et aux Noirs comme aux Indiens. Envisager en parallèle les débats concernant le traitement des Indiens et des autres secteurs sociaux permet de dépasser la fausse opposition entre le monde indien et le monde espagnol, et d’examiner les échos existant entre les colonisations interne et externe.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".