Bibliographic record
Abstract
A presente entrevista se insere no âmbito do projeto de pesquisa "Diálogos sobre Ciência do Desenvolvimento Regional", que conduz entrevistas escritas e gravadas (em plataforma virtual) com destacados pesquisadores da Área de "Planejamento Urbano e Regional e Demografia" -Plurd -área de conhecimento científico da Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior -Capes -, coordenado por docentes do programa de Mestrado/Doutorado em Desenvolvimento Regional da Universidade do Contestado.As entrevistas escritas e virtuais objetivam: a) Compreender a trajetória histórica, social, política e econômica dos debates sobre desenvolvimento; b) Analisar as variações conceituais decorrentes da interface das diversas áreas do conhecimento na constituição do discurso científico do desenvolvimento; c) Conceber aspectos constitutivos da área da Plurd e de sua condição estratégica ao acolher programas de stricto sensu de "Desenvolvimento Regional"; d) Constituir registro escrito sobre a Ciência do Desenvolvimento Regional disponível ao público interessado nas questões, debates, pesquisas e conhecimentos promovidos por esta área do conhecimento.
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 | 0.040 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.022 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".