MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083168268 · doi:10.4000/espacoeconomia.17272

Uma abordagem historiográfica e econômica sobre a ideia de progresso e sua relação com o bem-estar

2020· article· pt· W3083168268 on OpenAlex
Pedro Henrique de Morais Campetti

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

VenueEspaço e Economia · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsCanadian Historical Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Em diversos países do mundo tem ocorrido uma busca por novos modelos de avaliação do progresso econômico e social. Apesar do crescimento econômico ser importante, novas prioridades são necessárias para as sociedades atingirem níveis mais elevados de bem-estar. Este artigo tem por objetivo fazer uma revisão bibliográfica sobre os conceitos de progresso e de bem-estar através de uma perspectiva historiográfica e econômica. Também procura analisar quais são as medidas econômicas, sociais, ambientais, ou mesmo multidimensionais, utilizadas para avaliação da situação da sociedade ou de certa região. Tal discussão é apresentada de modo cronológico e conceitual. Inicialmente são explorados os conceitos, começando pelo constructo Progresso para em seguida tratar de Bem-Estar. Por último, são analisadas as medidas tradicionais e hodiernas do progresso.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), 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 score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.255 · 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