Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual Citizens es producto de una de las investigaciones más completas que existen hasta el momento sobre el abuso sexual en los campus de las universidades[1]. Tomando como punto de referencia la Universidad de Columbia de Nueva York, este estudio aporta abundante luz para esclarecer no solo la dinámica del proceso que conduce al abuso sexual, sino que lanza tres conceptos fundamentales para aproximarse a la prevención del abuso en los campus universitarios. Combinando la atención de los proyectos de vida sexual de los estudiantes con la promoción de la ciudadanía sexual y la transformación de las geografías sexuales se sugiere una ruta hacia un mundo donde el abuso sexual sea menos común. Sin embargo, como dicen los autores, este libro no ofrece una solución como tal al problema del abuso sexual, sino que presenta una nueva forma de pensar acerca de este problema, una forma que promueva un aumento en la variedad de estudios de intervención. El propósito del libro ha sido mirar cómo las instituciones y las estructuras sociales y no cómo las psyches individuales contribuyen al abuso sexual (p. 153). [1] Las traducciones al español son hechas por el autor de la reseña.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.017 |
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".