P<scp>ablo</scp> P<scp>iccato</scp>. <i>A History of Infamy: Crime, Truth, and Justice in Mexico</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In A History of Infamy, Pablo Piccato attempts to unpack the historical process that gave rise to the high level of criminal violence and impunity in contemporary Mexico. The origins of criminal violence and impunity can be traced to the chaos and instability that emerged after Mexico’s Independence War (1810–1821). However, Piccato chose to focus his analysis on the twentieth century, in particular a span of six decades starting after the Mexican Revolution (1910–1920) and ending in 1980. The postrevolutionary regime became a model of stability in the context of Latin America, but failed to achieve meaningful democratic practices and the rule of law. The abolition of jury trials in 1929, paralleling the consolidation of political power in the hands of one political party (eventually to be known as the Partido Revolucionario Institucional, or PRI), meant that transparency in the judicial process began to dissipate. The loss of juries as a vehicle for public discussions of crime and justice did not diminish the public’s interest and engagement, but instead led to people’s reliance on alternative sources of information, such as the nota roja (newspapers and periodicals devoted to publishing crime news), and later on to the appearance of crime novels. These were key sources of information in the development of Mexican citizens’ “criminal literacy,” Piccato’s term for a fundamental level of “knowledge about the world of crime and the penal system” in Mexico (6). In analyzing criminal literacy, Piccato argues that we are able to see not only how crime shaped representations of that reality, but also how these cultural representations (crime sheets and crime novels) influenced criminality itself.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.012 |
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".