Constitución y consolidación de la Museología como campo disciplinario: reflejos de la legitimación de un campo específico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La idea central del presente trabajo es disertar sobre la Museología como una reivindicación de profesionales de museos por una especificidad de conocimiento y de objeto, consecuencia de un proceso científico y disciplinario. Presenta la Museología como campo del conocimiento que ha buscado su delimitación desde la segunda mitad del siglo XX. La investigación desarrollada en este trabajo, de orientación teórico-documental, tiene como objetivos: 1) disertar sobre las contribuciones de Bourdieu para la comprensión de campo – de carácter científico; y 2) identificar las distintas corrientes que buscan una definición reconocida y legitimada de la Museología, a nivel mundial. Las consideraciones indican una perspectiva donde el conjunto de distintas corrientes y nociones observables (sobre un objeto de estudio específico) es de suma importancia para la consolidación de la Museología como campo científico; esas corrientes y nociones, a su vez, se introducen en este campo y buscan un lugar dentro de sus límites.
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 | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 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".