O "Ciência sem Fronteiras" pelo olhar da comunidade acadêmica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aimed to identify, from the point of view of professors and former scholarship holders of the Science without Borders Program (SwB) enrolled at Federal University of Alfenas (UNIFAL-MG) and at Federal University of Itajub (UNIFEI), in the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil, what is the perception of the academic community regarding the program, based on the objectives proposed in the decree that created SwB, which, in this research, were configured into categories of analysis. Launched in 2011, SwB was the most prominent project in the scope of Brazil's internationalization of higher education and science, technology and innovation (ST&I) policies, drawing the attention of universities and citizens, the media in general and the scientific community, which generated praise, but also criticism, especially in relation to its planning. Based on the literature on internationalization of higher education and the Science without Borders Program itself, the research, grounded on a multiple case study method, helped to understand the perception of the program in the institutions concerned. With a qualitative approach, this multiple case study was performed with the application of online questionnaires to the university community through the platform Online Pesquisa, which subsidized the data collection. Documentary analysis and interviews were also carried out with the managers of International Relations and Institutional Coordinators of the SwB
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.010 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".