MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239371903 · doi:10.24124/2018/58858

Landscape and collective memory in post-conflict Ayacucho, Peru: Narratives and photography of survivors.

2018· dissertation· en· W4239371903 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kirk Walker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsIndigenousCollective memoryTransitional justiceCommissionNarrativeGovernment (linguistics)CriminologyMilitantPolitical scienceEconomic JusticeGeographyRepresentation (politics)SociologyEthnologyGender studiesLawEcologyPoliticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peru was enveloped in an internal armed conflict from 1980 to 2000. The Shining Path, a militant communist group, sought to revolutionize Peru through violence. Indigenous Peruvians were targeted in extrajudicial massacres and killings. Nearly 70,000 people, mostly indigenous, were either killed or disappeared by both the Shining Path and government military forces (CVR 2004). Today, post-conflict Peru still grapples with the human rights violations of the past and is challenged to achieve reconciliation. For the victims of violence, how the memory of the conflict is conveyed is an important element of the transitional justice process (Alexander et al. 2004). My interdisciplinary research explores collective memory, the shared representation of the past that is socially constructed by a group of people (Halbwachs 1992). The Peruvian Truth and Reconciliation Commission identified the region of Ayacucho as the epicentre of violence during the conflict (CVR 2004, 21).

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParticipatory Visual Research MethodsFrench-language works237,207