MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gap in Techno-Scientific Activity: The Iberoamerican Context

2010· article· en· W1928235733 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juan R. Coca, Jesús A. Valero Matas, Francesca Randazzo

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in sociology of science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Communication, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsidePovertyContext (archaeology)PoliticsPolitical scienceScientific developmentSociologyGeographyDevelopment (topology)Law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to apply the hermeneutic approach to social imaginaries of science and technology. Special attention will be given to discuss how the techno-scientific system intends to face poverty, although the system focuses to a different direction, which is a growing inter-penetration with the economic system. The techno-scientific system, as well as its politics, sets aside poor people. In such a context, the scientific-technologic gap continues to grow, generating gradually two different paces of international development. Factors like the cyborgization, robotization, the development of ITCs, etc., have an impact into the poorest regions, ending up into situations of technologic-scientific neo-colonialism. In spite of peripheral states efforts, the possible development of these regions is an always faced and never overcome challenge. Transformations of the scientific-technologic system, which are more and more scientifically and technologically dependent every day, constitute as a gap. Key words: Science; technology; poverty; scientific-technologic gap

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0110.015
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.143
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in sociology of scienceSame topicMedia, Communication, and EducationFrench-language works237,207