MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Os BRICS frente à pandemia da COVID-19: uma análise preliminar sobre políticas comparadas

2021· article· pt· W3137075123 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

VenueConjuntura Internacional · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRural Development and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Economic growthEconomicsMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pandemia do novo coronavírus (COVID-19) atingiu todos os países do mundo, impactando os sistemas de saúde e atingindo as economias, desde as bases produtivas nacionais até as cadeias de produção e comércio mundiais. Com isso, a pandemia vem reposicionando o papel das políticas públicas e dos Estados-nacionais, uma vez que capacidades estatais em saúde precisaram ser fortalecidas e programas econômicos e sociais precisaram ser desenvolvidos para resgatar empresas e empregos. O objetivo deste trabalho é verificar, de forma preliminar, como os países que compõem os BRICS, afora o Brasil, têm enfrentado a pandemia, apontando algumas tendências comuns em suas abordagens. Metodologicamente, buscamos identificar convergências e diferenças nas ações dos governos de cada país BRICS no que tange às medidas de contenção da doença, políticas relacionadas à economia e aos empregos, bem como iniciativas de cooperação internacional. Concluímos com possíveis lições que podem ser extraídas destas experiências para o Brasil.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.005

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.254 · 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