MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A INSUFICIENTE REGULAMENTAÇÃO BRASILEIRA PARA O FENÔMENO DAS FAKE NEWS

2021· article· pt· W3195415509 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Diogo Dal Magro, Jéssica Cindy Kempfer

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Filosofia do Direito · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth, Politics, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMitacs
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceNewspaperPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O presente artigo parte da problemática: qual a forma de repressão estatal brasileira relativa às fake news? Como provável hipótese de pesquisa tem-se que o Estado brasileiro não tem sido eficiente em dirimir este problema, carecendo de regulamentação específica. O objetivo geral consiste em analisar a atuação do Estado em relação à contenção de fake news. Para tanto, utilizou-se o método de procedimento dedutivo e o de pesquisa bibliográfico. Como conclusão, percebe-se que o Estado brasileiro não consegue alcançar o fenômeno das fake news e a repressão acaba ficando a cargo da iniciativa privada.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0080.010
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de Filosofia do DireitoSame topicYouth, Politics, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207