MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415570429 · doi:10.19053/uptc.01233769.19054

La conversa metodológica para las cartografías de la memoria en la ciudad de El Alto: Apthapi de saberes

2025· article· es· W4415570429 on OpenAlexaff
Tatiana Vargas Condori, Vania Susana Calle Quispe, Abigail Roque Miranda, Pedro Aliaga Mollinedo

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectiva geográfica · 2025
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, violence, and history
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituatedNarrativeCitizen journalismConversationIdentity (music)Reading (process)StorytellingIdentification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present article proposes the Apthapi de Saberes methodology from “conversa (al paso)” (informal conversation in passing), applied to the construction of memory cartographies in the 12 de Octubre area of the city of El Alto, Bolivia. It is framed within a qualitative approach that prioritizes horizontal dialogue with the community. Through the participation of elderly residents, historical narratives about the formation of the area are collected, allowing for an understanding of its transformation from a collective and situated perspective. The methodology integrates participatory cartographies with the use of historical and visual photographic material. Additionally, the proposed method led to the identification of key categories such as the process of self-managed urbanization, the configuration of popular commerce, and the gradual implementation of basic services. These findings were materialized in a community Archizine and a digital storytelling project, formats designed to democratize access to knowledge, enabling an accessible and participatory reading experience. These were shared with the community in printed form, featuring artisanal binding. Finally, the article reflects on the implications of the Apthapi de Saberes as a replicable methodology in other contexts where knowledge production has traditionally been shaped by external perspectives and where the preservation of oral traditions is essential. Ultimately, this methodology not only documents the past but also strengthens the identity and memory of the area through its own residents.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 venuePerspectiva geográficaSame topicMemory, violence, and historyFrench-language works237,207