MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810032482 · doi:10.24067/rjfa7;10.1:90

A PUBLICIDADE ENGANOSA E ABUSIVA E A TUTELA DO CONSUMIDOR

2013· article· pt· W2810032482 on OpenAlexaff
Bruna Nayara dos Santos Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Jurídica da FA7 · 2013
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicBrazilian Legal Issues
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O presente artigo se propõe a fazer uma análise sobre a sociedade dita pós-moderna, quanto à construção de seus padrões culturais e a forma como eles estão intimamente ligados ao uso da publicidade ilícita. O controle dessas práticas perniciosas à formação do comportamento dos consumidores deve se dar em dois âmbitos distintos, mas complementares, a saber, o jurídico e o privado, cabendo ao CONAR, como órgão de controle exclusivamente privado, exercer o controle ético sobre os profissionais de publicidade e propaganda, de forma a cumprir com o mandamento constitucional de defesa do consumidor.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Jurídica da FA7Same topicBrazilian Legal IssuesFrench-language works237,207