MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reis negros, cabanos, e a Guarda Negra: Reflexões sobre o monarquismo popular no Brasil oitocentista

2019· article· pt· W2908250338 on OpenAlex
Hendrik Kraay

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVaria Historia · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumo Analisando três casos de monarquismo popular no final da Colônia e no Império brasileiro, este artigo sustenta que o monarquismo popular constituía um elemento importante, embora nem sempre reconhecido, da política popular. O apoio popular à monarquia e os esforços dos integrantes das classes baixas para se associarem aos reis e aos imperadores eram, com frequência, vistos como ameaças radicais aos detentores do poder. Baseado nos trabalhos de estudiosos da cultura e da política popular brasileira, manuscritos, periódicos e observações de estrangeiros, este artigo focaliza no costume, do final da época colonial, das irmandades negras em eleger reis (e outros indícios de visões afro-brasileiras da monarquia), na Revolta dos Cabanos em Pernambuco (1832-1835), e na onda do apoio popular à monarquia que varreu o Brasil nos dezoito meses entre a Abolição da escravidão (13 de maio de 1888) e a proclamação da República (15 de novembro de 1889). Cada um desses episódios demonstra como a compreensão popular da monarquia com frequência estruturava demandas radicais.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.005

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.260 · 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