Educacion y desarrollo economico de America Latina en el siglo veinte y perspectivas para el siglo veintiuno
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En este articulo realizamos un analisis comparativo del desarrollo economico de America Latina durante el siglo veinte, en comparacion con USA y Canada y algunos paises de Europa Occidental, que pone de manifiesto que aunque la tasa de crecimiento del Producto Interior Bruto real fue mayor en Latinoamerica que en las otras areas, el incremento del PIB real por habitante fue menor, debido a las importantes diferencias en las tasas de crecimiento poblacional, ya que dichas tasas fueron relativamente moderadas en USA, Canada y Europa mientras que fueron muy elevadas en Latinoamerica. El articulo dedica una atencion especial a la evolucion de Mexico, Argentina, Brasil y la America Andina, y analiza el impacto positivo de la educacion sobre la economia de estos paises y su importancia para acelerar el desarrollo economico durante las primeras decadas del siglo veintiuno. We present an international comparison of economic development in Latin America during the 20th century, in relation with the USA and Canada, as well as with several Western Europe countries, which shows that although the average growth rate was higher in Latin America, income per capita has had a lower rate of growth due to the high value of the average rates of population growth in Latin America. The article focuses, particularly, on the evolution of Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and Andean America, and we analyse the positive impact of education on economic development and the importance of increasing the public expenditure on education per inhabitant in order to get a improve economic development during the first decades of the 21st century.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".