Pensar la inexistencia social. Reflexiones acerca de una idea de Vivianne Châtel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este breve artículo de reflexión versa fundamentalmente sobre la idea de “inexistencia social”propuesta por Vivianne Châtel. El objetivo es mostrar que en la contemporaneidad se presentan, de manera sistemática y generalizada, poderosos mecanismos de expulsión social, los cuales se hacen invisibles a la población en general. El propósito principal es evidenciar la manera cómo la autora logra desentrañar los elementos de tales mecanismos e invitar al debate y a la reflexión sobre la importancia de la solidez teórica como prerrequisito imprescindible de la intervención social. Tal invitación, aunque general, se hace especialmente a los estudiosos del management y de las organizaciones. El artículo apoya la discusión sobre el Desarrollo de los pueblos y aporta a su marco teórico, divulgando la contribución de académicos de actualidad poco conocidos, por ahora, en la esfera latinoamericana. This brief article of reflection focuses primarily on the idea of "absence social" proposed by Vivianne Châtel. The objective is to show that in the contemporaneity are presented, in a systematic and widespread, powerful mechanisms of social expulsion, which are invisible to the general population. The main idea is to show how the author achieves unravel the elements of such mechanisms and invite to the debate and reflection on the importance of the theoretical strength as a imperative prerequisite of social intervention. It is intended to article supporting the discussion on the development of peoples and contribute to their theoretical framework, disseminating the contribution of academics now little-known by now, in the latin-american area.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".