MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186166040 · doi:10.4000/espacoeconomia.19705

Capitalismo sob a hegemonia financeira e o poder no Brasil

2021· article· pt· W3186166040 on OpenAlexaff
Roberto Moraes Pessanha

Bibliographic record

VenueEspaço e Economia · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsASTER
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Não é razoável pensar a retomada de um projeto nacional-desenvolvimentista que promova redução das desigualdades e integração regional, sem que se leve em conta que hoje temos um Brasil bem distinto de duas décadas atrás. Como em outras partes do mundo, as finanças alcançaram a condição de centro dinâmico da economia promovendo enorme extração de valor da economia real. Tudo está se transformando em ativos em meio a colossais inovações financeiras que usando os fundos e as plataformas digitais realizam enorme captura de excedentes num “capitalismo de gestão de ativos”. Dominação tecnológica que amplia a hegemonia financeira. O mercado de capitais passou a dirigir políticas setoriais no lugar do Estado, numa lógica ainda mais radical de extração de valor do trabalho na economia brasileira. Em breve diagnóstico, este texto propõe um debate mais amplo sobre como confrontar essa realidade em curso num processo que não é natural e sim opção neoliberal e excludente. Na essência é necessário retomar o protagonismo do Estado, a soberania da Nação e nossa capacidade de intervenção em políticas econômicas-setoriais-regionais-territoriais e sociais. Só a política pode ou não realizar essa tarefa.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspaço e EconomiaSame topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207