Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ante todo, debe efectuarse una precision metodologica en un doble sentido: en primer lugar, sobre la nocion del Gran Caribe o de cuenca del Caribe, y, en segundo termino, en referencia al nivel de analisis que utilizamos. Los paises europeos tienen sobre el continente americano una vision que coincide, en buena medida, con la que poseemos en America Latina. Estariamos hablando de que el continente americano puede ser estudiado por paises y grupos de paises, al tomar en cuenta a varios actores mas o menos definidos: en primer lugar, tenemos a Canada, con su caracter especifico, y a Estados Unidos, tambien tratado de manera autonoma. Mexico constituye tambien, en esta vision, un capitulo aparte; luego estaria America Central, con sus particularidades, pese a tratarse de varios paises, y con sus propios mecanismos de dialogo con la Union Europea; el Caribe insular, por supuesto, tiene tambien un caracter distinguible.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".