Bibliographic record
Abstract
Après plusieurs mois de terrain ethnographique dans le nord-est du Guatemala, l’auteure s’attache à démontrer que, malgré leur pertinence au niveau national, les questions ethniques sont loin d’être centrales dans le quotidien des habitants de cette région. Et surtout, quand elles interviennent – souvent à l’initiative de l’anthropologue ou des institutions nationales et internationales –, elles se déclinent d’une manière très différente de celles énoncées par l’État. Refusant d’entrer dans les catégories dominantes dans lesquelles elle ne se retrouve pas, la population de la région de Quiriguá a choisi de ruser. La ruse consiste ici essentiellement à contourner la conception bipolaire de la société guatémaltèque, largement dominante, tant au niveau de l’État que du Mouvement maya, et présente dans de nombreux textes scientifiques. Cet article vise à décrire et comprendre les positions assumées selon leur genre, leur génération et leur parcours personnel par les habitants de la région de Quiriguá vis-à-vis du discours hégémonique concernant la question ethnique au Guatemala.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".