Bibliographic record
Abstract
¿Como estudiar una provincia de un imperio? Esta es la cuestión que se plantea al historiador de al-Andalus en las épocas almorávide y almohade. Frecuentemente, los autores que trabajan sobre al-Andalus han encerrado su objeto de estudio en el marco peninsular y pre-nacional, definiéndolo a través una doble oposición: frente a la cristiandad latina «reconquistadora», por un lado, y frente a las tribus beréberes magrebíes invasoras, por otro. Si este enfoque es legítimo para las épocas emiral y califal, lo es mucho menos, sin embargo, desde finales del siglo XI hasta el acceso al poder de los Naṣríes. Esta comunicación revisa algunas conclusiones «etnicistas» sobre la historia de al-Andalus en los siglos XI-XIII, para insistir sobre la necesidad de desplazar el enfoque hacia el Magreb, en particular en la época almohade, en el momento en que el poder magrebí intenta emanciparse de los modelos políticos y religiosos orientales
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 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".