Uma abordagem historiográfica e econômica sobre a ideia de progresso e sua relação com o bem-estar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 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".