Bibliographic record
Abstract
El siglo XX confirma la definitiva institucionalización (académica y científica) de la sociologíacomo un conocimiento público legitimado, algo que no habían conseguido ni los pioneros delsiglo XVIII ni los grandes creadores del XIX (de Comte a Spencer, pasando por Tocqueville oMarx). Partiendo de los datos recopilados por la ISA en su Congreso de Montreal, este trabajopretende responder a la pregunta por los textos más importantes de la sociología del siglo pasado,aprovechando para hacer una periodificación del desarrollo del pensamiento sociológico enel marco de una sociología de la sociología. Se repasan así a los grandes institucionalizadores decomienzos del XX, a los compiladores que, entre 1920 y 1968, van a conformar dos grandesescuelas (funcionalista y marxista) antagónicas en mucho pero convergentes en creencias fundamentales,al giro constructivista o hermenéutico de la sociología a partir de 1968 (aún dominante),y el regreso posterior a la Gran Teoría que se solapa con el más reciente análisis de la sociedadpost- (industrial, burguesa o moderna).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".