MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2223724289 · doi:10.18294/rppp.2014.653

Entre los “límites” y las alternativas de “otro” desarrollo: el problema de las necesidades básicas. Un ejercicio genealógico.

2014· article· es· W2223724289 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Lucía Grondona

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Perspectivas de Políticas Públicas · 2014
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American socio-political dynamics
Canadian institutionsWSP (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El artículo presenta un estudio genealógico del diagnóstico sobre las “necesidades básicas”. Partiendo de reformulaciones recientes, desde la perspectiva de la historia del presente y del análisis materialista del discurso, se analizan diversos dominios de memoria en los que ese diagnóstico adquirió sus sentidos. Luego de revisar el contexto de “emergencia” del problema de las necesidades básicas insatisfechas a comienzos de la década del ochenta en la Argentina, el artículo revisa memorias discursivas previas inscriptas en el debate sobre los “límites del desarrollo” y las propuestas de “otro desarrollo” entre 1970 y 1983. A partir de ello, se vuelve observable el aspecto polisémico y polémico del diagnóstico en cuestión, usualmente desatendido en las revisiones críticas de la historia del concepto. En este recorrido, se exponen documentos relevantes para la conformación de los saberes expertos de la pobreza en América Latina, generalmente ausentes en los estudios especializados (vgr Modelo Latinoamericano). Estos documentos nos permiten cuestionar los análisis que asumen que la problematización alrededor de las “necesidades básicas” fue importada desde el centro hacia la periferia o desde los organismos internacionales hacia los países dependientes.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.329
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Perspectivas de Políticas PúblicasSame topicLatin American socio-political dynamicsFrench-language works237,207