MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366522211 · doi:10.18800/9789972428364.012

Plazas y cercaduras : una aproximación a la arquitectura pública Moche IV y V en los Valles de Moche y Santa

2008· book-chapter· es· W4366522211 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jorge Gamboa Velásquez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLatin American history and culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Las edificaciones denominadas cercaduras han sido apreciadas, al evaluar la transición entre las fases Moche IV-V, como un tipo de arquitectura administrativa propia de la última fase moche, que se caracterizó por una reestructuración del panorama político, con el abandono de Huacas de Moche previo al surgimiento de Galindo. Sin embargo, se ha demostrado recientemente que la ocupación de Huacas de Moche duró más tiempo de lo que se pensaba, que Huaca de la Luna funcionó hasta mediados del siglo VII d.C. y tuvo actividades residenciales hasta el 750 d.C. Además, la Plaza 1 de Huaca de La Luna es comparable, en concepción formal, a las cercaduras y a la plaza del conjunto ceremonial mayor de Galindo. Este artículo analiza el origen y la evolución de las cercaduras y plazas amuralladas, comparando casos de arquitectura pública en Huaca de la Luna, Galindo, G-121 y G-135; estos dos últimos son cercaduras Moche IV asociadas al control de áreas especificas del valle de Santa y a la ampliación agrícola hacia el sector Lacramarca, e investigados por el Proyecto Santa de la Universidad de Montreal. Proponemos que al final de la fase Moche V no aparecieron nuevas formas de edificaciones públicas sino que se adaptaron modelos que habían sido concebidos anteriormente

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLatin American history and cultureFrench-language works237,207