Imigrantes brasileiros no Porto. Aproximação à perenidade de ordens raciais e coloniais portuguesas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans un contexte de migration de Bresiliens dans la ville de Porto, quels processus derivent de la confrontation entre deux classifications raciales differenciees, la bresilienne et la portugaise ? Selon les classifications raciales defendues et stimulees par l'Etat portugais, creees durant l'experience coloniale en Afrique (le soi-disant « troisieme empire »), les Bresiliens metis et noirs peuvent transposer leur propre position dans les relations raciales entre les Bresiliens a Porto. Comme la classification raciale portugaise, diffusee par les politiques de l'Etat, construit l'image d'un Bresil metis a partir d'une lecture particuliere du lusotropicalisme a la Gilberto Freyre (base de l'actuelle ideologie « lusophone portugaise), les Bresiliens metis et noirs developpent une politique identitaire qui renforce les stereotypes du discours national bresilien. Ainsi, de la confrontation entre les deux classifications raciales, les populations metisses et, a une moindre echelle, noires, reussissent a construire une place hegemonique dans la production et la pratique d'une identite nationale bresilienne dans l'ancienne metropole, meme si pour cela ils portent a l'extreme la reproduction non seulement des stereotypes courants sur les Bresiliens au Portugal que ceux produits par la narration premiere dans la nation bresilienne.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".