La reconfiguración capitalista en la publicación mediante los acuerdos “transformadores” y el Plan S
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El presente trabajo muestra los resultados de un estudio que aborda al modelo de publicación promovidopor el Plan S, una de las principales políticas de Acceso Abierto de Europa y Estados Unidos y propuesto por cOAlition S en 2018. Se analiza la incidencia del Plan S en la reconfiguración de la comunicación científica a escala global y la medida en que fortalece la comercialización del conocimiento. El marco conceptual que orienta el análisis es el capitalismo informacional. El trabajo de investigación toma como fundamento empírico uno de los principales instrumentos de operación del Plan S, los denominados “acuerdos transformadores”. El universo de estudio lo constituye información de 542 acuerdos documentados en septiembre de 2022, a partir de minería de datos sobre información no estructurada (web scraping) realizada en Efficiency and Standards for Article Charges (ESAC), una iniciativa de la Sociedad Max Planck con información sobre acuerdos registrados voluntariamente por las instituciones o consorcios que se han articulado al Plan S.
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 | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".