Muerte, Budismo, y Protocolo Funerario en España: aproximación a algunos grupos budistas, y a la FCBE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Al mismo tiempo que poseemos abundantes estudios sobre budismo en Asia y diferentes paises de Europa (Baumann, 1995; Baumann, 2002, Bluck, 2004), Estados Unidos (Fields, 1992), Australia (Rocha y Barker, 2010), o Canada (Matthews, 2006) la situacion en Espana es diferente en tanto en cuanto se posee muy poco conocimiento academico sobre el budismo que se practica en este pais en lo que se refiere a las lineas generales del mismo (Prebish y Baumann, 2002), su practica, y a la particularidad de como es concebida la muerte –y su relacion con la vida-. Asimismo, puede afirmarse que en pleno ano 2016, son casi inexistentes los datos academicos sobre el protocolo funerario budista puesto a punto en Espana, y sobre la Federacion de Comunidades Budistas Espanola. Lo que se propone por tanto en esta investigacion, presentada como Trabajo de Fin de Master, es ampliar los conocimientos academicos acerca de estas cuestiones, incidiendo en como es concebida la muerte desde un budismo occidental (espanol), y en el protocolo funerario budista espanol.
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 | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".