From Quilmes to Gondwana: Exploring a "Latin American" History of Science, Physis, 2023
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay is a survey of some of the symbolic and real conditioning fac- tors that shape the practices of the history of science in Hispanic America. It presents an overview – partly autobiographical – of the topics that historians of science working or born in Latin America – in places such as “Quilmes” – have chosen in order to establish a dialogue either with other local historians or with the international community. This essay reflects on the role of neocolonialism and national historiographies as well as on the need of questioning the mere idea of Latin America as a space that defines our field. It proposes to rather adopt – as some scholars are already doing – a spatial historical reference such as Gondwanaland, to think in terms of the areas of a network opened to multi-sided exchanges and connections from all over the world. It also argues that theo- ries, concepts and words far from replacing each other according to the accumulation of knowledge and experience, far from progress and paradigmatic changes, coexist in syn- chrony, mixing or not, with different degrees of conflict. Far from a characteristic of the history of science in our countries, it appears as a general sign of contemporary academic practice.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".