MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2750349861 · doi:10.15517/rcs.v0i155.30255

¡CONGA NO VA! LOS GUARDIANES DE LAS LAGUNAS: DEFENDIENDO LA TIERRA, EL AGUA Y LA LIBERTAD EN CAJAMARCA, PERÚ

2017· article· en· W2750349861 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Isla

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Los Guardianes de las Lagunas de Conga en la región de Cajamarca es un caso de estudio de un movimiento de justicia del medio ambiente que nació en 1999 en contra de la minería a cielo abierto de Yanacocha, cuyos dueños son Newmont Mining Corporation (U.S.), Buenaventura (Perú) y el Banco Mundial. Desde el 2011, estas corporaciones quieren expandir su proyecto minero hacia lo que han denominado Minas Conga, lo que ha intensificado las actividades del movimiento de justicia. El artículo muestra la defensa del territorio, el agua y la libertad por los protectores del agua. Se centra en la participación de mujeres y hombres campesinos, comunidades indígenas y sociedad civil. Se presentan tres momentos de la lucha de clases, primero, la defensa de la tierra; segundo, la protección del agua; y tercero, la batalla por la libertad. Como resultado, los miembros del movimiento están sufriendo la presencia de la policía y los militares, represión, acoso, persecución fiscal, detenciones ilegales, prisión y muerte.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicSustainable Development and Environmental PolicyFrench-language works237,207