MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Donas, pretas livres e escravas em Luanda (Séc. XIX)

2018· article· pt· W2905852584 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueEstudos Ibero-Americanos · 2018
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Luanda, a capital da colônia portuguesa de Angola, era uma cidade de maioria feminina em meados do século XIX. A população feminina era composta de donas, pretas livres e escravas que ocupavam espaços diferenciados nessa sociedade colonial. As filhas da elite luso-africana eram desde a infância reconhecidas como donas, refletindo seu status social e econômico. Ao longo da vida, elas acumulavam escravos, terras e objetos de luxo através de heranças e da participação no comércio local e de longa distância como mercadoras e intermediárias entre comerciantes estrangeiros e fornecedores africanos. As pretas livres buscavam oportunidades no comércio ambulante como quitandeiras e oferecendo serviços aos habitantes da cidade. Escravas, por sua vez, também adentravam o pequeno comércio das ruas e mercados e desempenhavam atividades domésticas nas residências de estrangeiros e luso-africanos. Esse estudo se baseia em registros de escravos, batismos, óbitos e escrituras de compra e venda para explorar experiências de donas, pretas livres e escravas na Luanda dos oitocentos. Numa sociedade luso-africana e escravocrata, elementos como descendência portuguesa, posse de bens e adesão à cultura lusa conferiam prestígio e determinavam as trajetórias pessoais de mulheres livres e escravizadas.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEstudos Ibero-AmericanosSame topicColonialism, slavery, and tradeFrench-language works237,207