MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393405601 · doi:10.4000/america.6753

«Mapas de relación», historias cartográficas del océano Atlántico (siglos XIII-XX)

2024· article· es· W4393405601 on OpenAlexaff
Amaia Cabranes Rubio

Bibliographic record

VenueAmérica · 2024
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Spain
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artículo nace de una constatación: a partir del siglo xviii emerge una cartografía específica del océano Atlántico. Estos «mapas del atlántico» son invariablemente la representación de conexiones intraoceánicas: «mapas de relación» de distinta índole cuyo análisis abre una ventana sobre la construcción social del mundo atlántico en la época contemporánea así como nuevas vías de reflexión para los Atlantic Studies.La primera parte destaca la aparición desde fines del siglo xviii de mapas concebidos como «mapas del Atlántico». Se pone así de manifiesto la existencia, en los albores del periodo contemporáneo, de otras territorialidades más allá de aquellas de los Estados-nación y de los nuevos imperios coloniales en construcción. La segunda parte propone clasificar las representaciones cartográficas del océano Atlántico en función del tipo de relación que las produce. ¿Qué nos dicen los mapas de los lazos que han unido las diferentes orillas del océano en la Época Contemporánea? ¿Qué significaciones materiales y simbólicas han tenido? La cartografía actualmente difundida con las nuevas tecnologías de comunicaciones muestra que, en lo que concierne a las estrategias geopolíticas, el océano permanece como un «territorio» codiciado.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAméricaSame topicHistorical Studies on SpainFrench-language works237,207