Educação a distância no Brasil e no Canadá: visões, paisagens e perspectivas.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O Brasil e o Canadá possuem dimensões continentais e regiões de difícil acesso, necessitando de alternativas que possibilitem a chegada dos processos educativos para toda a população. É nesse contexto que a EAD justifica a sua presença e importância em vários países do mundo. O presente trabalho tem como objetivo analisar, sob enfoque comparativo, as concepções, o panorama geral e as perspectivas da EAD nos dois países. Résumé: le Brésil et le Canada possèdent des dimensions continentales et des régions reculées, d´où la nécessité d´alternatives pour permettre à l´ensemble de la population d´avoir accès aux processus éducatifs. C´est dans ce contexte que se justifie la présence et l´importance de l´enseignement à distance (EAD) dans plusieurs pays du monde. Le présent travail a pour objectif d´analyser, de manière comparative, les conceptions, le panorama général et les perspectives de l´EAD dans les deux pays.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".