MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099769262 · doi:10.5801/ncn.v14i1.599

Ciência, cientistas e democracia desfi gurada: o caso Belo Monte

2011· article· pt· W2099769262 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

VenueNovos Cadernos NAEA · 2011
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHydropower, Displacement, Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydroelectricityAmazon rainforestFrontierCredibilityPolitical scienceGeographyPoliticsEngineeringArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hydroelectric frontier in the Amazon is expanding due to the construction of large projects such as Santo Antonio and Jirau in the Madeira River, proposed projects in the Tapajós River, and Belo Monte in the big bend of the Xingu River (licensed in February 2010). Large projects that generate energy in the Amazon region provoke political, social, and environmental conflicts. These conflicts affect the credibility of the Environmental Licensing Evaluation process. Discourse from social groups that oppose development policies for the Belo Monte Hydroelectric Dam project offer insight into the origins and progression of these conflicts. Criticisms of the Experts Panel Network created to analyze the Environmental Impact Assessment in Belo Monte and other sectors of the society are evaluated.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.009

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.319 · 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