Enculturación científica a partir de la argumentación: una cuestión sociocientífica (CSC) sobre implantes estéticos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo presenta el resultado parcial de la implementación del trabajo de grado, Enculturación científica a partir de la argumentación: una cuestión sociocientífica (csc) sobre implantes estéticos, para optar al título de Licenciada en Química. Dicho trabajo fue desarrollado mediante una secuencia de enseñanza, en la Institución Educativa Distrital Provincia de Quebec (nombre del colegio donde se realizó el estudio), ubicada en la Localidad de Usme de la ciudad de Bogotá D.C. La propuesta nace de la necesidad de articular la producción científica con la enseñanza de la química, mediante situaciones controversiales que permitan el fortalecimiento de habilidades argumentativas y de formación ciudadana, a partir de las cuales los estudiantes generen razonamientos científicos, éticos y morales sobre esta y otras cuestiones de corte sociocientífico.
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 | 0.023 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".