MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225115619 · doi:10.11117/rdp.v19i101.6166

Os Livros de Batismo e a Arte de Burlar a Legislação de Proibição do Tráfico Internacional de Escravizados

2022· article· pt· W4225115619 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDireito Público · 2022
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersUniversity of Rochester
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artigo objetiva questionar as razões pelas quais um número significativo de africanos escravizados teve seus batismos registrados na Igreja de Santo Amaro de Ipitanga, apesar de viverem em Salvador, muitas léguas de distância da dita Matriz. A hipótese aberta é de que após o alvará de 1831 (que proibia o tráfico internacional de escravos), senhores de engenho na região de Brotas começaram a batizar seus escravizados em capelas privadas e registrá-los em locais distantes, como a Igreja de Santo Amaro de Ipitanga. Tais atos eram uma estratégia para contornar as leis brasileiras de proibição do tráfico internacional de escravizados. Para a análise de vasta documentação que aborda um período de cem anos, pré e pós proibição do tráfico, utilizamos os dados pessoais de africanos que constam no banco de dados do projeto Freedom Narratives. A análise de trajetórias pessoais e movimentação espacial foi feita a partir de um exame comparativo possível através da metodologia criada pelo projeto para analisar o que se compreende como “big data”.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.287 · 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