Bibliographic record
Abstract
Esse trabalho busca contribuir duplamente com o campo dos estudos sociais urbanos: por um lado, ampliando o entendimento sobre a produção e dinâmicas territoriais de uma determinada realidade municipal e, por outro, desenvolvendo tal processo como uma metodologia apresentada pelo teórico urbano Mike Davis. Por meio de uma leitura do cotidiano sobre as cidades (especialmente Los Angeles), Davis frequentemente analisou a realidade social, cultural e ambiental de maneira interconectada. Nesse sentido, de maneira semelhante, propomos uma análise da cidade do Rio de Janeiro, enquanto estudo de caso, na qual serão aplicados métodos e conceitos que o autor utiliza com fim de construir um “mapa extrapolado” e uma hipótese de futuro para a mesma. Dessa maneira, propomos um entendimento sobre o espaço urbano da cidade, destacando sua forma espacial atrelada às suas dinâmicas sociais e, consequentemente, ampliamos a visão de diversos conflitos a serem objetos de possíveis intervenções. Esse trabalho parte de uma análise sobre o espaço urbano carioca, permeando a leitura de simulacros e sugerindo futuros possíveis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.005 |
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".