As políticas públicas no desenvolvemento da miticultura en Galicia: o papel da Unión Europea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Actualmente, la mitilicultura gallega pasa por ser una actividad economica fuertemente apoyada por el sector publico. A los efectos de sopesar y contrastar esta aseveracion, en este trabajo se realiza una revision historica del papel desempenado por la Administracion, particularmente por la Union Europea, desde el nacimiento de este tipo de cultivo hasta la actualidad, sistematizando los diversos ambitos a traves de los que influyo en su desarrollo. Para la sistematizacion de los diversos ambitos a traves de los cuales las politicas publicas influyeron en el desarrollo de la actividad mejillonera, partimos de una caracterizacion de las funciones atribuibles al sector publico en materia de cultivos acuicolas y, en particular, en la produccion de mejillon. A estos efectos distinguimos tres funciones centrales de las que se derivan una serie de ambitos especificos de actuacion: planificacion y gestion, control e inspeccion y creacion de capital social fijo. Como resultado, se verifica el notable cambio en la contribucion de las Administraciones al desarrollo de la mitilicultura que representa la creacion de los Gobiernos autonomicos y la incorporacion a la Union Europea.
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 | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".