El retorno del indio olvidado o los usos del pasado indígena en el imaginario uruguayo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En los estudios coloniales latinoamericanos, la herencia cultural ind?gena no le interesaba demasiado a los practicantes de la disciplina hasta que surgi? lo que Walter Mignolo y Rolena Adorno llamaron el nuevo paradigma. Hasta ese momento, los estudios m?s importantes se dedicaban a estudiar solamente las versiones europeas de la conquista desde un marco ideol?gico y una perspectiva cultural occidentales. Los trabajos enmarcados en el nuevo modo de producci?n intelectual de que hablan Mignolo y Adorno, en cambio, abrieron las puertas del canon colonial a textos escritos por ind?genas, a objetos no textuales (tales como mapas, amoxtllis, c?dices pictogr?ficos y otros artefactos culturales) y, sobre todo, promovieron una actitud gnoseol?gica m?s consciente de la unilateralidad de los enfoques hasta entonces predominantes. Estos cambios han hecho posible una revisi?n del ?rea de estudios que la ha vuelto considerablemente menos sesgada. A pesar de estos cambios registrados en la academia internacional, la cuesti?n ind?gena nunca ha recibido, en Uruguay, mucha atenci?n. En este trabajo trato de comentar algunas de las causas que determinan ese estado de cosas y de ofrecer, adem?s, un panorama del tratamiento actual del tema ind?gena en el Uruguay.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".