MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mulheres do meio rural: percepção quanto ao seu processo de trabalho no campo

2020· article· pt· W3107855557 on OpenAlex

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

VenueNursing Edição Brasileira · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRural Development and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsNuclear Waste Management Organization
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objetivo: compreender como as mulheres rurais percebem o seu processo de trabalho no campo. Método: Pesquisa de campo, descritiva, exploratória, com análise qualitativa, realizada no municí­pio de Cascavel/PR de janeiro a julho de 2018 com 29 mulheres. Resultados: Conforme dados coletados por meio de entrevista, com as mulheres trabalhadoras rurais, tendo como questão norteadora, "Me fale o que a senhora vê de bom no trabalho que realiza no campo", construí­mos 05 Discurso do Sujeito Coletivo (DSC), e destacado 08 ideias centrais, sendo elas: Ocupação; Sustento da famí­lia; União familiar; Interação social; Qualidade de Vida; Liberdade; Atividade prazerosa; Opção de vida. Conclusão: A pesquisa desvela que as mulheres trabalhadoras rurais entendem seu trabalho como uma ferramenta poderosa a partir de uma percepção integradora que ajusta não só o ponto de vista produtivo, como, também, nos aspectos social, ambiental e cultural.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.241 · 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