Bibliographic record
Abstract
La Revista Científica de Contabilidad “Apuntes Contables” (ISSN impreso 1657-7175; ISSN digital 2619-4899), informa a la comunidad académica que, tras una revisión detallada de las condiciones editoriales, científicas e institucionales, se ha cerrado formalmente su proceso editorial con la publicación del número 36. Esta decisión responde a las transformaciones en los sistemas de evaluación científica y a las limitaciones estructurales que impiden garantizar la continuidad de la revista bajo los estándares de calidad e impacto exigidos actualmente. Agradecemos profundamente el respaldo recibido durante más de dos décadas de labor editorial comprometida con el avance del conocimiento contable. En consecuencia, a partir de la fecha, la Revista Apuntes Contables no recibirá nuevas postulaciones de artículos. Invitamos a los autores a redirigir sus propuestas a otras publicaciones científicas que contribuyan a fortalecer el diálogo académico y la visibilidad de la producción investigativa en contabilidad. Reiteramos nuestro agradecimiento a todos los autores, evaluadores, lectores y colaboradores por su compromiso y confianza a lo largo de estos años.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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".