Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este ensaio trata de questões relacionadas a questionamentos sobre o papel do intelectual público e da universidade como recursos para tratar de questões públicas e assumir ativamente o engajamento público como parte do contrato universitário. O ensaio trabalha com os protestos sociais e políticos que antecederam à Copa do Mundo da FIFA, em 2014, no Brasil, como base para pesquisar duas interrogações: Para que servem as universidades? Que oportunidades são proporcionadas pelo esporte para se atuar como intelectual público e ser recurso de esperança no mundo de hoje? Este pequeno estudo sobre o futebol, o Brasil e o papel do intelectual se baseia em fontes primárias e secundárias. O artigo conclui com a recomendação de que as pessoas que trabalham no esporte e por meio dele na universidade têm um meio ideal para trabalhar com o público sobre as questões que são importantes para o público, e devem usar integralmente essa oportunidade.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".