Antropología crítica, antropología compartida y autoetnografía entre los maseualmej de la Sierra Nororiental de Puebla (1984-2015)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I shall sketch here four decades of anthropological research with two maseual organizations. With the Unión de Cooperativas Tosepan, I did, and still do, what is called ‘critical anthropology’, related with their project of social and economic change in the region. I analized socio-cultural themes in function of objectives shared by the anthropologist and the organization. With the Taller de Tradición Oral Totamachilis, we went through a process of shared ethnography, which entailed a deep change in the classical forms of interaction between the anthropologist and the indigenous actors for the production of anthropological knowledge. From the very beginning, we agreed that we would define together the objectives of the research, elaborate the methodology, and publish under double authorship. Through discussions, we would try to reach consensus on the interpretations. After, I will talk about the rise —in the same area—of young maseualmej ethnographers which started producing an original reflection on their language and culture, in relation with their pedagogical and political concerns. This reflection may take the form of a monograph, a dictionary, a tale and, more recently, an audiovisual document or a radio programme.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it