Bibliographic record
Abstract
En esta reflexión acerca del buen vivir se parte de breves aportaciones sobre el significado de este concepto y se presentan dos experiencias basadas en la información empírica recabada por la autora. La primera por medio del trabajo con comunidades indígenas de la Selva del municipio Las Margaritas, Chiapas, en el último cuarto del siglo xx, para tratar de explicar cómo pudo surgir este concepto en la vida comunitaria; se relaciona esta información con la cosmovisión indígena y el valor de la armonía. La segunda experiencia que se presenta es de años recientes, en Los Altos de Chiapas. Esta indaga acerca de los valores del buen vivir desde el punto de vista de mujeres tsotsiles, tomando como muestra un grupo de Zinacantán, a quienes se invita a realizar una comparación entre la forma de vida que llevan y la que ofrece un proyecto de desarrollo gubernamental, para llegar, finalmente, a conclusiones.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".