Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to analyze important anthropological ethnograpies of Brazil, with voyage literatures in the sixteenth century which resulted from the expedition, commanded by vice-admiral Nicholas Durand de Villegagnon. So my research focused on Andre Thvet's Les Singularite de la France autrement nommee Amerique: e de plusiers terres e isles decouvertes de notre temps, (Paris, 1557) and Jean de Rery's Histoire d'un voyage faict en la terre du Bresil, (Geneve, 1578). Thevet described the nakedness and anthropophages of Indio, animals, plants and geography of marvelous Brazil, to increase knowledge on America for colonializing 'France antarctique', Brazil, 'France equinoxiale', Amazon and further Neue France', Canada. To Thevet, Brazil was 'Lost Land' of 'Golden Age' where bellicositic 'Cannibales' and warriors of Amazones live. Rery's purposes are more complex. He utilized the themes and contents of Thevet's book, but criticized its contents, if necessary, compulsorily. And he articulated complexive intention to denunciate Villgagnon's activities and vindicated religous position of huguenot. In research on Brazil Indios and material conditions Rery has been supposed to recognize the equal status of indios and European culture in the light of historical experience of St. Bartholomew's Day Masscre of Religious War. In spite of his absolute belief in christianity Rery offerd a momentun for others to describe Indio as 'le bon sauvage' In this observational interpretation processes Thevet and Refry revealed their colonialistic identity which affirmed conquerial value of European. Especially Rery thought the 'absence of writings' by indio made mysthical fable from incorrect knowledge. But in reality the 'fable' is his system of knowledge, reproduced by Refry as a European. They imagined and prescribed shaman as an ruler of devil's imperial, and Indio woman as a witch who cannibaled and had vagina dentata. In modern perspective the Europeans conquered accepted image and indio woman that was symbolized as Brazil. On this ground the cultural relativism and the concept of 'bon sauvage' of Thevet and Rery were, in reality, the outer cover of colonialistic identity, implicited in their mind.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".