Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prezada leitora, prezado leitor, o terceiro volume da revista Estudos de Religião de 2021 continua a resistir! Diante do cenário constantemente instável, com as mais variadas demandas sociais e pandêmicas, apresentamos ao público artigos cada vez mais inovadores e urgentes para a pesquisa em Ciências da Religião. Concluímos o ano publicando um dossiê dedicado às epistemologias das ciências sociais nos estudos religiosos. Tanto o dossiê do número anterior (sobre linguagens da religião) quanto o atual contemplam frutos da XXIV Semana de Estudos da Religião: evento organizado pelo PPG em Ciências da Religião da Universidade Metodista de São Paulo, entre os dias 16 à 18 de novembro de 2020, cujo tema abordou reflexões epistemológicas da área 44 da CAPES. Quanto ao dossiê Epistemologia das Ciências Sociais da Religião, há uma apresentação específica redigida pelos organizadores do dossiê.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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".