MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Do mito de Métis aos conceitos de Métis de "teto de vidro" e "labirinto de Cristal" Análises de Assimetria de gênero com enfoque CTS

2020· article· pt· W3044806020 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Josiane de Souza Surmani, Cíntia De Souza Batista Tortato, Sidney Reinaldo da Silva, Rogério Baptistella

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Mundi Sociais e Humanidades (ISSN 2525-4774) · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth, Politics, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O presente artigo discute questões de gênero na ciência e tecnologia utilizando o mito de Métis. A abordagem metodológica com o enfoque em Ciência, Tecnologia e Sociedade, permite relacionar elementos da atividade científica e elementos culturais. A análise apóia-se no “mito de Métis” e a similaridade com os conceitos de “teto de vidro” e “labirinto de cristal”, mecanismos de manutenção do poder masculino. Contribuindo para a compreensão das assimetrias de gênero presentes na sociedade e na ciência.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.284 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Mundi Sociais e Humanidades (ISSN 2525-4774)Same topicYouth, Politics, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207