MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086306454 · doi:10.4000/nuevomundo.439

El colonialismo y los límites del relativismo: comentarios sobre “la cuestión colonial” de Annick Lempériére

2004· article· es· W2086306454 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNuevo mundo mundos nuevos · 2004
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American Cultural Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annick Lempériére nos advierte atinadamente sobre la reificación de conceptos a menudo utilizados como modelos pre-armados antes que como categorías históricas. En forma general, su llamado de atención sobre los riegos de la utilización mecánica del mote “colonial” a los más diversos escenarios y momentos, sin una adecuada contextualización histórica, me parece acertada. No obstante, Lempériére oscila entre esta advertencia (del todo entendible) y un cuestionamiento más radical del mismo con...

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.313 · 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