Contexto político-eleitoral, minorias religiosas e voto em pleitos presidenciais (2002-2006)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O artigo analisa o comportamento eleitoral dos votantes evangélicos no Brasil e sua percepção sobre o regime democrático. Com base nas respostas dos entrevistados do ESEB 2002 e 2006 sobre o voto nas eleições presidenciais, a comparação do padrões de voto revelou a formação de apenas um importante grupo de identidade, mas não de interesse: enquanto no segundo turno de 2002, o candidato Lula foi o destinatário da maioria dos votos evangélicos identificados com o candidato Garotinho no primeiro turno, em 2006, o candidato à reeleição, Lula, não obteve margens de apoio entre os evangélicos significativamente maiores do que as conseguidas entre o restante dos eleitores. O artigo também destaca que os evangélicos são os eleitores mais insatisfeitos e ambivalentes com relação ao funcionamento da democracia no Brasil.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".