MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2624851023

AVANZA LA UNAM OCHO LUGARES EN EL RANKING INTERNACIONAL DE LA WEB. OCUPA YA EL SITIO 51

2008· article· es· W2624851023 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raquel Briseño Dueñas, Gustavo Ayala

Bibliographic record

VenueGaceta UNAM (2000-2009) · 2008
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology in Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceGeographyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LA UNAM ASCENDIO OCHO POSICIONES EN EL RANKING MUNDIAL DE UNIVERSIDADES EN LA WEB, AL PASAR DEL LUGAR 59 AL 51 EN LOS ULTIMOS SEIS MESES, CONDICION QUE LA MANTIENE COMO LA MEJOR DE IBEROAMERICA. ESTA CLASIFICACION -ELABORADA POR EL CONSEJO SUPERIOR DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTIFICAS DE ESPANA- UBICA COMO NUMERO UNO EN EL ORBE AL MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY; DEL SEGUNDO AL QUINTO SITIOS FIGURAN LAS UNIVERSIDADES ESTADUNIDENSES DE HARVARD, STANFORD, CALIFORNIA BERKELEY Y PENNSYLVANIA, RESPECTIVAMENTE. LA UNAM SE POSICIONA EN ESTE RANKING -QUE EVALUA LAS P GINAS WEB DE CUATRO MIL INSTITUCIONES DE EDUCACION SUPERIOR DEL PLANETA- POR ARRIBA DE SUS SIMILARES DE OSLO, TOKIO, EDIMBURGO, MONTREAL, GLASGOW, FLORIDA, AMSTERDAM Y KYOTO, ENTRE OTRAS. EL CONSEJO, POR MEDIO DEL LABORATORIO DE CIBERMETRIA, REALIZA EL AN LISIS CUANTITATIVO DE INTERNET Y LOS CONTENIDOS DE LA RED, ESPECIALMENTE LOS RELACIONADOS CON LA GENERACION Y COMUNICACION ACADEMICA DEL CONOCIMIENTO CIENTIFICO. EN RELACION CON LA CLASIFICACION DE LATINOAMERICA, DESPUES DEL PRIMER LUGAR DE LA UNAM EN LA REGION Y 51 MUNDIAL, LA SEGUNDA MEJOR ES LA UNIVERSIDAD DE SAO PAULO, EN EL 113 A ESCALA GLOBAL; EN EL TERCERO Y 212 DEL ORBE SE ENCUENTRA LA UNIVERSIDAD ESTADUAL DE CAMPINAS, BRASIL, SEGUIDA DE LA UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE, EN EL CUARTO Y 214 INTERNACIONAL, Y LA QUINTA, LA BRASILENA UNIVERSIDAD FEDERAL DE RIO DE JANEIRO, EN EL 330 DE LA POSICION GENERAL. LAS CINCO MEJORES UNIVERSIDADES DE EUROPA SON: CAMBRIDGE, EN EL ESPACIO 26; EL INSTITUTO TECNOLOGICO SUIZO, CON SEDE EN ZURICH, EN EL 32; DE HELSINKI, EN EL 42, Y OXFORD, EN EL 47. EL RANKING -QUE PUEDE CONSULTARSE EN EL SITIO WWW.WEBOMETRICS.INFO/INDEX_ES.HTML- ANALIZA EL VOLUMEN, VISIBILIDAD E IMPACTO DE LAS P GINAS QUE OFRECEN LOS ORGANISMOS DE EDUCACION SUPERIOR, CON ENFASIS EN LA PRODUCCION CIENTIFICA; BUSCA AUMENTAR LA DIVULGACION DEL CONOCIMIENTO Y MEDIR ACTIVIDAD CIENTIFICA, RENDIMIENTO Y REPERCUSION EN LA RED.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.022

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGaceta UNAM (2000-2009)Same topicEducational Technology in LearningFrench-language works237,207