Transferencia y divulgación del conocimiento: \nun estudio preliminar de análisis bibliométrico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Knowledge’s Transfer has methodological phases such as producing, transforming, socializing and integrating the information acquired and applicable to human needs; it is a process that involves active and conscious participation in the knowledge’s creation, knowledge’s disclosure by the transmitter and the acquisition and application of this knowledge by the receiver; whose conceptual interest is disclosure of scientific and traditional knowledge in a population. For this reason, the development of this article aims to stand out the conceptual transversality of Knowledge’s Transfer, from the development of a bibliographic review analysis supported by the Bibliometry technique of 17 duly indexed articles. In the first phase, articles are selected in a time range of 10 years, their indexes, countries and influential years of publication are analyzed. In the first phase, articles are selected in a time range of 11 years, their indexes, countries and influential years of publication are analyzed. In the second phase, the bibliography of the articles is selected, related to the subject in a time range of 13 years, an analysis of representative data such as year, country, authors and affiliations is developed. This analysis shows a greater influence on the research of the concept, by countries such as Canada (MacMaster University) and Mexico (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México and Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo); with a prevalence in the publication period between 2009 and 2014.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".