MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404539728 · doi:10.70845/2572-3626.1363

Anclas para sueños silvestres. Una conversación con Eduardo Kohn

2022· article· es· W4404539728 on OpenAlex
Mónica Cuéllar Gempeler, Daniel Ruiz-Serna

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTipití Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South America · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComparative Literary Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKohn–Sham equationsHumanitiesPhysicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the Spanish publication of the book How Forests Think. Toward an Anthropology Beyond the Human, Eduardo Kohn (Associate Professor of Anthropology at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and Affiliated Researcher at FLACSO in Ecuador) reflects on the origins and the trajectory of his research in the Ecuadorian Amazon. The conversation dwells on questions of theory and method, on key concepts of this influential work (such as absence, hierarchy, and "emergence"), and, finally, on the new paths that have appeared since the initial publication of this book in 2013. The narrative that takes place in the interview will be helpful for those approaching How Forests Think for the first or umpteenth time, leading us to appreciate the many kinds of stories unfolding between the lines of this fascinating work. A propósito de la publicación en español del libro Cómo piensan los bosques. Hacia una antropología más allá de lo humano (2021), Eduardo Kohn (profesor de antropología de la Universidad de McGill en Montreal, Canadá, e investigador afiliado en la FLACSO de Ecuador) reflexiona sobre los antecedentes y la trayectoria de su investigación en la Amazonía ecuatoriana. La conversación se detiene en cuestiones de teoría y método, en conceptos claves de este influyente trabajo (como la ausencia, la jerarquía y la emergencia) y, finalmente, en los nuevos caminos que han surgido a partir de la publicación inicial de este libro en 2013. Se trata de un recorrido conversado que servirá de apoyo para quienes se aproximen a Cómo piensan los bosques por primera o enésima vez, y que nos lleva a apreciar los muchos tipos de historias que se desenvuelven entre las líneas de esta fascinante obra.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.265 · 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