Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis la conquête du Pérou par les Espagnols au XVIe siècle, de nombreuses études portant sur l’empire inca ont été réalisées. Pourtant peu de ces études traitent de l’armée et des institutions militaires. La plupart des chercheurs modernes s’étant penchés sur le sujet considèrent que l’armée inca était en majeure partie composée de paysans qui n’étaient pas spécialisés dans le métier des armes. Le rôle de véritables spécialistes, soldats professionnels, semble donc négligeable. Il est pourtant fort étonnant qu’une société étatique ayant constitué un empire de conquête permanent n’ait pas développé une plus grande spécialisation militaire. En fait, un examen attentif des sources ethnohistoriques indique clairement qu’on a jusqu’à présent sous-estimé le rôle des spécialistes dans l’armée inca. Cet article a donc pour but de démontrer l’existence et l’importance de cette spécialisation militaire.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".