Pensar wak’a: horizontes estéticos, naturaleza y religiosidad en la tierra de los jaguares. Dos procesos de fe en los Andes del Perú, 1730-1773
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study investigates the celebration of ritual divination tables and rites of curing evil spells and illnesses in the central Andes in the middle of the eighteenth century. An analysis is made of the faith process carried out between 1762 and 1773 against Lorenza Vilches, a native of Yauyos, dedicated to healing, farming, and divination; as well as of the denunciations for witchcraft against Juan Santos Reyes, a farmer and native of the town of Cajamarca, between 1730 and 1736. Both cases allow us to approach the study of Andean religious practices through the mediation experiences of ritual specialists who put into communication the visible world of the people, the world of tutelary forces, and the influence of sacred landscapes in the organization of the social world. The research advances the study of the cult of wak’as, with a particular emphasis on the ritual aesthetics that developed in the cult of the Sun, the devils, and their changing and reciprocal natures.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".