MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076239488 · doi:10.7202/1008311ar

Religion, mouvements sociaux et démocratie : convergences et contradictions au Mexique

2012· article· fr· W2076239488 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Malik Tahar Chaouch

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitique et Sociétés · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociety, Economy, and Ethics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loin de constituer une entité monolithique, l’Église catholique a engendré au Mexique, comme ailleurs, une diversité de courants de pensée, contradictoires entre eux, voire en conflit avec l’institution. Parmi eux, la théologie de la libération et la théologie indigène ont participé à la formation de mouvements sociaux et de secteurs nationaux de la société civile. L’impact de la théologie indigène dans le diocèse de San Cristóbal de las Casas, au Chiapas, n’en est qu’une illustration. Ces activismes, auxquels a contribué la religion, sont actuellement considérés à l’avant-garde du combat pour la démocratie et les droits de l’homme. Or, ils sont le produit du croisement de deux cultures politiquesa prioridistantes des principes de la démocratie représentative : l’antilibéralisme catholique, foncièrement antimoderne, et la gauche révolutionnaire, d’inspiration marxiste. Ce texte se propose d’abord de reconstruire la généalogie paradoxale de ces « activistes » de la démocratie. Il analysera ensuite leur passage progressif vers l’idéal démocratique et ses effets sociopolitiques. Il montrera, en ce sens, les ambivalences de leur adhésion aux principes démocratiques, ainsi que leur implication dans le contexte actuel de démocratisation au Mexique.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitique et SociétésSame topicSociety, Economy, and Ethics ResearchFrench-language works237,207