MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896785279

El complejo Guazapa en El Salvador: La diáspora tolteca y las migraciones pipiles

2011· article· es· W2896785279 on OpenAlexaff
William R. Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2011
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLatin American history and culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En el siguiente articulo se presentan las evidencias arqueológicas de un grupo de asentamientos prehispánicos ubicados en las zonas occidental y central de El Salvador que fueron ocupados durante el período postclásico temprano (900-1200 d.C.). El autor planea demostrar que la cultura material de estos sitios tiene su origen en el México central, en sitios de filiación tolteca , además exponer que los principales habitantes de estos sitios fueron grupos de habla náhuat que emigraron de México hacia Centroamérica como parte de la «diáspora tolteca», una secuencia de movimientos poblacionales que ocurrieron durante los últimos siglos de la época prehispánica [Fowler 1989a: 32-49, 1989b, 1989c, 1995: 144-164, 2001]. Por otra parte se vincula el complejo Guazapa de El Salvador y las primeras migraciones pipiles principalmente con el colapso de Tula Chico , el autor a través de la investigación, propone que grupos de habla náhuat abandonaron y fueron expulsados de Tollan al final de la fase Corral y concluye que el mundo tolteca en el postclásico temprano se extendió hacia los fértiles y populosos valles del occidente y centro de El Salvador.

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 score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicLatin American history and cultureFrench-language works237,207