El valor del análisis cultural para la historiografía de las décadas del treinta y cuarenta en Colombia: estado del arte y nuevas direcciones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article demonstrates the ways in which cultural analysis can contribute to the historiography of twentieth-century Colombia, particularly the 1930s and 1940s and the period of the República Liberal. With this goal in mind, and from a Latin American perspective, it reclaims for cultural history the work of authors we consider precursors and examines texts that have shaped the field. First, we outline the partisan historiography that first examined the República Liberal as an object of historical analysis after 1948, and the later introduction of disciplinary analyses that, from a structuralist perspective, proposed the first critical approaches to the period. We then discuss works that opened up new paths and that, more or less explicitly, introduced the analytical tools and methodologies of cultural analysis, thus expanding the repertoire of historical actors and actions that made up the warp and woof of life during this period. Finally, we map out recent works on the first half of the twentieth century in other Latin American countries that can suggest ways to delve further into the human experience during these two decades, a topic that remains barely studied.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".