MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367025048 · doi:10.25062/0120-0631.808

Fondos soberanos de inversión como amenaza a las soberanías hemisféricas

2017· article· es· W4367025048 on OpenAlexaff
Alejandra Cerón R

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de las Fuerzas Armadas · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicExtractivism and Socioeconomic Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Los fondos soberanos de inversión han sido un mecanismo recurrente de las grandes economías pertenecientes a los países del primer mundo, para asegurar riqueza y entrar en las dinámicas de especulación financiera propias del capitalismo globalizado. El auge inesperado de estas formas de capital guarda una relación directa con el hermetismo (o la ausencia de transparencia) con que se han manejado muchos de ellos ante la opinión pública. En América Latina es posible apreciar cómo la configuración de nuevas líneas de producción económica, basadas en esta economía extranjera, en muchos casos ha llegado a convertirse en una nueva forma de poder y dominación sobre el territorio, controlando la vocación del uso del suelo, las innovaciones tecnológicas y las formas de contratación laboral, todos estos aspectos pertenecientes a los componentes de nuevos paradigmas de la seguridad. Abrir una discusión respecto a las formas de abordar las investigaciones relacionadas, y los panoramas posibles para el análisis, puede contribuir al campo de estudios sociales sobre seguridad y defensa.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de las Fuerzas ArmadasSame topicExtractivism and Socioeconomic IssuesFrench-language works237,207