MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1529182086 · doi:10.15210/interfaces.v1i1.6283

A natureza do relacionamento Brasil-Canadá: similaridades, contrastes e a questão ambiental.

2015· article· pt· W1529182086 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Geraldo Milioli

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2015
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBrazilian History and Foreign Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade do Estado de Santa CatarinaNatural Resources CanadaMinistério do Meio AmbienteUniversidade Estadual de CampinasUniversidade Federal de Santa CatarinaGoverno Brasil
KeywordsPolitical sciencePoliticsHumanitiesSociologyPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O período pós-guerra representa um marco para as transformaçõesocorridas no mundo. No presente, observa-se a necessidade de umaprofundamento das relações e cooperação entre os países, como também dabusca de soluções integradas para problemas de ordem sócio-econômica,política, cultural e ambiental. Nessa dinâmica complexa de um mundo modernoglobalizado e que experimenta um conjunto de desafios, encontram-se Brasil eCanadá. O foco deste artigo é analisar e discutir os interesses comuns eestratégicos dos dois países, apresentar argumentos quanto à desejabilidade dacooperação entre eles, sendo que suas singularidades inerentes favorecem apossibilidade de demonstrar ao mundo um processo de cooperação onde assimilaridades e os contrastes sugerem caminhos à complementaridade.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0090.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicBrazilian History and Foreign PolicyFrench-language works237,207