Movimientos indígenas y respuestas estatales frente a la pandemia en México, Ecuador y Brasil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La pandemia de la covid-19 puso de manifiesto el rol del Estado y de los Gobiernos en la gestión de esta situación de emergencia, así como la capacidad de los movimientos sociales para proponer formas de acción colectiva, de autonomía y de solidaridad. Con base en la observación de medios digitales pertenecientes a movimientos indígenas en México, Ecuador y Brasil –entre marzo de 2020 y julio de 2021– se analiza cómo estos movimientos han reorganizado sus formas de resistencia y han llevado a cabo acciones basadas en sus demandas, al visibilizar la ausencia y negligencia del Estado y establecer alianzas o asumir el reto de manera autónoma. Los casos abordados en el presente artículo permiten ampliar la comprensión sobre la potencia e importancia del accionar de los movimientos sociales, y, a la vez, proponer un entendimiento de la pandemia que atraviesa múltiples dimensiones sociales y ambientales, más allá de la cuestión sanitaria.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".