Bibliographic record
Abstract
A discussão da literatura sobre a relação entre a terra e conflito violento não foi promovida adequadamente pelos grupos de Toronto, Bern-Zurique e Oslo, que discutem, dentre outras questões, as motivações que geram tais beligerâncias. No entanto, a terra, motivo de desejo e disputa de muitos que compõe a base da população rural, têm consequências dramáticas, inclusive causando conflitos violentos, o que não é tratado pela academia. Países não desenvolvidos e em desenvolvimento, como os da América Latina, possuem uma das distribuições de terra mais desiguais do planeta. O paper busca, via análise quantitativa e estudos de caso de países selecionados, verificar semelhanças e diferenças entre os Estados da região, considerando a distribuição desigual de terra, a produção de energia ao invés de alimentos, e as aquisições de grandes extensões de terra por conglomerados internacionais. O período estudado considera o retorno à democracia destes países e a incompatibilidade do aumento de conflitos violentos no campo com a democracia.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".