MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Etnografiar una consulta que no tiene lugar

2025· article· es· W4412528666 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Dominik Langlois

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologica · 2025
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Policies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artículo se dedica a develar las condiciones de producción de una investigación en un «campo social minado» (Albera, 2001; RodríguezGaravito, 2011) caracterizado por la incertidumbre de su objeto y las dinámicas de interacción social que generan las luchas sobre el consentimiento libre, previo e informado (CLPI). El análisis reflexivo de la «inquietud etnográfica» (Fassin, 2008) contribuyó a la construcción y al esclarecimiento del objeto de la investigación. Basándose en una investigación etnográfica de las ocupaciones por un movimiento de resistencia a la minería, el texto analiza incertidumbres en torno al agotamiento del proceso consultativo del pueblo xinka sobre la mina Escobal en el suroriente de Guatemala para destacar cómo la consulta puede ser interpretada como objeto de resistencia por los sujetos de la resistencia en un contexto minero, debido a su lento proceso.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.382 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologicaSame topicSocial Sciences and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207