Bibliographic record
Abstract
?Que ha supuesto la cumbre del G-20 de Toronto para la agenda de problemas de la economia global? El Marco para un Crecimiento solido y equilibrado planteado en la cumbre del G-20 en Pittsburgh –que requeria mas ahorro y exportaciones para los paises con deficit exterior (EEUU y muchos de la zona euro) y politicas mas expansivas reforzando las “fuentes domesticas de crecimiento” para los superavitarios (con China y Alemania al frente)– se ha visto sustancialmente modulado en Toronto por las nuevas urgencias de consolidacion fiscal en un grado que dependera de decisiones nacionales o, en su caso, del marco disciplinario de la UE. Las decisiones pretendidamente globales sobre regulacion financiera se aplazan en unos casos y se “devuelven” al ambito nacional en otros. ?Se trata de un acuerdo en “estar en desacuerdo”, simplemente un compas de espera hasta Seul en noviembre con nuevas realidades mas decantadas o de unas dilaciones que refuerzan peligrosas inercias? Entre ellas, la sensacion de que el politics as usual –priorizando las urgencias nacionales– se superpone al business as usual –sin aprender las lecciones acerca de como llegamos hasta aqui– en un marco en que la transferencia de poder desde las economias avanzadas hacia las emergentes se traduce en las correlativas de valores, con revisiones a la baja de las concepciones “occidentales” comenzando por las posibilidades y alcance del “Estado del bienestar”.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.003 |
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".