Grafiti: exposición de la religiosidad de las pandillas de San Luis Potosí
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumen El propósito principal de este artículo es definir dos de las más importantes pandillas de una de las colonias marginales del estado de San Luis Potosí, como lo es la colonia Primero de Mayo. Esto principalmente mediante la interpretación de algunos de los grafitis que se encuentran por las calles de este barrio, los cuales revelan importantes aspectos sobre ambas pandillas, como lo es su influencia extranjera, la rivalidad que tienen entre ellas y, lo más importante, su estrecha relación con imágenes religiosas, como la imagen de la Virgen de Guadalupe y la de San Judas Tadeo. Esto para llegar a la conclusión de que dichas pandillas, mediante esta conexión religiosa, intentan depurar sus acciones delictivas para de esta manera encontrar una especie de aceptación divina que contraste con el rechazo que reciben por la sociedad que los rodea. De esta manera, bajo este manto protector divino que encuentran en ambas imágenes católicas, la venta de drogas y el robo a transeúntes y viviendas, que son algunas de las actividades ilícitas de estos pandilleros, se vuelven acciones de reclamo y justicia que arremeten en contra de una sociedad injusta que los condena a vivir en una extrema miseria y gran pobreza. Abstract The main purpose of this article is to define two of the most important gangs of one of the marginal neighbourhoods of the state of San Luis Potosí, known as the Primero de Mayo neighbourhood. This is mainly done by interpreting some of the graffiti found on the streets of this neighbourhood. These graffiti reveal important aspects about both gangs, such as their foreign influence, the rivalry between them, and, most importantly, their close relationship with religious images, like the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe and that of St. Jude Thaddeus. This leads to the conclusion that these gangs, through this religious connection, try to cleanse their criminal actions in order to find a kind of divine acceptance that contrasts with the rejection they receive by the society around them. In this way, under this divine protective mantle found in both Catholic images, the sale of drugs, mugging of bystanders, and house burglary, which are some of the illicit activities by these gang members, become actions of claim and justice that they take against an unfair society that condemns them to live in extreme misery and great poverty.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".