Bibliographic record
Abstract
DE ACUERDO CON EL RANKING MUNDIAL DE UNIVERSIDADES 2009 DADO A CONOCER AYER, LA UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTONOMA DE MEXICO SE SITUA ENTRE LAS 200 MEJORES DEL MUNDO, COMO LA PRIMERA DE AMERICA LATINA Y LA SEGUNDA DE IBEROAMERICA, DESPUES DE LA UNIVERSIDAD DE BARCELONA. SEGUN EL CATALOGO RESPECTIVO REVELADO POR EL DIARIO BRITANICO THE TIMES, QUE EVALUA A MAS DE 17 MIL INSTITUCIONES DE ENSENANZA SUPERIOR DEL ORBE, LA UNAM QUEDO UBICADA EN EL LUGAR 190. UNIVERSIDADES COMO LA DE SAO PAULO, QUE EL ANO PASADO FIGURO EN EL 196, Y LA DE BUENOS AIRES EN EL 197, NO APARECIERON EN LAS PRIMERAS 200 POSICIONES DE LA NUEVA CLASIFICACION. EN LA LISTA, DESGLOSADA POR AREAS ACADEMICAS, LA UNIVERSIDAD OCUPO EL LUGAR 99 EN CIENCIAS DE LA VIDA Y BIOMEDICINA, EL 133 EN CIENCIAS NATURALES, EL 146 EN HUMANIDADES Y ARTES, EL 160 EN INGENIERIA Y TECNOLOGIA INFORMATICA, Y EL 188 EN CIENCIAS SOCIALES. EL REPORTE REFIERE QUE SOLO 12 INSTITUCIONES MANTUVIERON EL MISMO LUGAR Y UNA DE ELLAS, LA DE BERGEN, NORUEGA, ESCALO 83 POSICIONES. EN TOTAL, 109 DE LAS PRIMERAS 200 PERTENECEN A ESTADOS UNIDOS, GRAN BRETANA, CANADA, AUSTRALIA Y NUEVA ZELANDA.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.005 |
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".