MODERNIZATION, NATIONALISM AND THE ELITE: the Genesis of Brazilian jiu-jitsu, 1905-1920 <em> MODERNIZAÇÃO, NACIONALISMO E A ELITE: a origem do jiu-jitsu brasileiro, 1905-1920 </em>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
http://dx.doi.org/10.5965/2175180303022011100 This article is based on a chapter of my dissertation entitled The Gracie Clan and the Making of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu: National Identity, Performance and Culture, 1905-1993. It analyzes the introduction, creolization, popularization and globalization of the martial art known as Brazilian jiu-jitsu, by examining the trajectory of the principal agents of these events, the Gracie family who reinvented the Japanese martial art by creating a complex, ritualistic hyper-masculinized life style, forged from the clash between tradition and modernity embed in violence “made in Brazil.” The article is divided in two sections in which I analyzed the introduction of Japanese jiu-jitsu as part of a turn-of- the-century global modernization. In the first part the narrative takes place in Rio de Janeiro in early twentieth century and examines the introduction of Japanese jiu-jitsu as modern school of physical education patronized by the military. This section is represented in the vignette “Round 1”. In the second part the narrative shifted to the Amazon where a modern school of jiu-jitsu was established as a result of a transnational encounter between a troupe of Japanese martial artists and a Scottish-Brazilian family. This section is represented in the vignette “Round 2”.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".