Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is concerned with analyzing the production of narratives of the past in different social contexts such as those to which the NGOs of Medellín have access.My approach to memory, from the concept of institutional memory, tries to understand the ways in which institutions such as NGOs occupy a place within the power structures and how they have an impact on the representations of the past.This thesis is organized into three chapters.The first chapter develops the theoretical framework of the thesis in which I argue the importance of the concept of institutional memory.In the second chapter, I seek to identify the origins of contemporary memory practices in Medellín.I concentrate on describing how the process of urbanization of Medellín made local memory practices very particular and noteworthy.Throughout this chapter, I unveil the historical links between the already mentioned organizational experiences and the contemporary interest in memory.And finally, in the third chapter, I examine a set of important institutional memory initiatives to demonstrate how neighborhood-based organizations were dispossessed of their own ways of remembering.In this chapter, I demonstrate that such practices entered into the civil society organization model promoted by NGOs and the local government.This work represents my interpretation of the process described.It contributes to a suggestive understanding of the processes regarding memory practices and commemoration over the past twenty years in Medellín.Six years ago, while working as dishwasher in an Italian restaurant in Halifax, I could not foresee the moment of writing my thesis acknowledgements.It seemed impossible back then but I stubbornly persevered.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".