Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vivimos el siglo del nacionalismo y, paradójicamente, el del individualismo. El pensamiento sobre la colectividad y sobre el sujeto invade las reflexiones de las ciencias sociales de los últimos 100 años, principalmente luego del boom del psicoanálisis y del marxismo. Metodológicamente, la necesidad de que las ciencias sociales sean consideradas ciencias, en comparación con las ciencias naturales y su Método, ha generado una imposibilidad de pensar la realidad por fuera de sus aspectos racionales. La propuesta de este artículo es la de pensar el nacionalismo cívico, desde las experiencias de Cataluña y del Quebec, para hacer una propuesta teórico-metodológica que, en el cruce entre sociología, antropología, ciencias políticas e historia, nos permita pensar este fenómeno tan actual de una manera más profunda. El nacionalismo no es únicamente desarrollado por las instituciones políticas, sino que es, principalmente, una experiencia cotidiana, una forma de hacer y de pensar nuestra identidad: la nación se piensa, pero principalmente se vive, se baila, se siente.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".