¿Se puede hablar inglés sin pensar como los estadounidenses? Sobre la globalización y los factores determinantes de la asimilación cultural
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(Disponible en idioma ingles) Basandome en investigaciones en linguistica y sicologia, empleo el lenguaje hablado como manifestacion de la aculturacion. Empleo datos a nivel del individuo y a nivel de la ciudad provenientes de la zona del Lago Ontario en Canada y estudio los factores que determinan la asimilacion cultural. Me concentro en la educacion, la edad, el ingreso y, en especial, en algunas variables que se suelen tratar cuando salen a colacion temas de globalizacion, tales como la inmigracion, mirar television, fronteras y los antecedentes de residencia de los individuos. Hallo que el contacto real si importa en tanto que factor determinante de la homogeneizacion cultural. El contacto virtual parece ser irrelevante. Este hallazgo es robusto a cambios de especificacion y a diversos metodos empiricos.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".