MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

2006-2016: Una década del programa de estudios básicos y de explotación de recursos naturales en el Perú

2019· article· es· W3164006370 on OpenAlexaff
Juvenal Cabezas Oruna

Bibliographic record

VenueAula y Ciencia · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBusiness, Innovation, and Economy
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El Programa de Estudios Básicos de la Universidad Ricardo Palma está cumpliendo a mediados de este año los primeros diez años de vida (2006-2016). El curso Recursos Naturales y Ecología, hoy Recursos Naturales y Medio Ambiente, ha acompañado al Programa de Estudios Básicos en toda esta década, desde su inicio, dictándose a todos los alumnos de la universidad. Una de las unidades temáticas principales del curso es el estudio de los recursos naturales que se dicta en las primeras semanas y que constituye un tema muy sensible en el país debido al impacto que tiene la explotación de los recursos naturales tanto en la economía nacional, como en las diversas comunidades peruanas y en el medio ambiente. Por este motivo el autor incluye algunas apreciaciones personales relacionadas con las decisiones que se han tomado alrededor de nuestros recursos durante los dos gobiernos democráticos desarrollados en dicha década correspondientes a los periodos 2006-2011 y 2011- 2016. En el presente artículo se revisa la explotación durante los años 2006-2016 de los siguientes recursos naturales: minerales, petróleo, gas natural, energía hidráulica, energía eólica, energía solar y roca fosfórica

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAula y CienciaSame topicBusiness, Innovation, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207