Bibliographic record
Abstract
El desarrollo de la teoría social latinoamericana ha mostrado una marcada tendencia a imitar el pensamiento de Europa y los Estados Unidos. Durante el siglo XVIII, las ideas de la Ilustración encendieron la imaginación de los criollos y les proporcionaron una base teórica para legitimar sus aspiraciones soberanas. El positivismo fue utilizado por las elites de la región en el siglo XIX como una consigna para lograr "el orden y el progreso" o, más bien, el orden sin progreso que les interesaba. En el siglo XX, la democracia liberal se esgrimió como un modelo normativo y, con frecuencia, como un disfraz para ocultar el “país real” que Octavio Paz encuentra sepultado bajo el “país legal” latinoamericano. Tras la Revolución Bolchevique, el Marxismo se transformó, para un importante sector político del continente, en la panacea de todos los males sociales. Más recientemente, el pensamiento neoliberal se ha convertido en la teoría y la ideología con que las élites latinoamericanas pretenden enfrentar los retos del siglo XXI.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".