Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brazilian Politics , Alfred P. Montero, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005, pp. 167. Brazil is a country of contrasts. This is one of the first, and most ubiquitous, phrases that one encounters with respect to this intriguing country. Visitors to Brazil soon echo this sentiment as they note its cultural sophistication in the arts, technological expertise in a number of industries, its vast, diverse territory, as well as its extreme economic and social disparity. It is the ninth-largest economy in the world, yet it is also one of the most inequitable; the top 1 per cent of the population retains 40 per cent of the country's wealth (5). It is fitting then that this reality provides the integrative theme in Alfred Montero's primer on Brazilian politics. The topic is first introduced with an effective depiction of Brazilian president “Lula” da Silva as he struggles to bridge competing social and economic imperatives when he attends the World Social Forum held at Porto Alegre, Brazil, and the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland. The text concludes with an observation that the president's adoption of a pragmatic agenda in order to secure economic growth through global markets will not adequately satisfy the desperate and immediate need for social reform where millions suffer and comparatively few prosper. Montero asserts that the root of this misery can be traced to the state's historic pattern of clientelistic politics, oligarchical rule and bureaucratic-authoritarianism (25).
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".