Una frágil frontera de piedra : las tenencias de fortalezas y su papel en la defensa del Reino de Granada (siglo XVI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En este artículo, analizamos el papel que la red de fortalezas financiada por la Corona desempeñó en la defensa del Reino de Granada a lo largo del siglo XVI. En primer lugar, estudiamos los orígenes del sistema de tenencias de fortalezas reales, su introducción tras la conquista del Reino y el lugar ocupado frente al resto de fuerzas que componían el sistema defensivo. Seguidamente, analizamos la evolución del estado material y la capacidad defensiva de las fortalezas a partir de las inspecciones que realizaron los visitadores, las cuales sacan a la luz una serie de males estructurales, tales como el incumplimiento por parte de los alcaides de sus obligaciones militares, el abandono y el deterioro material de los castillos. El proceso se acentuó a fines del siglo XVI y tuvo como factores determinantes la acumulación de importantes atrasos en el pago de los sueldos de los alcaides y la concepción de dichos oficios como cargos venales, bienes patrimoniales en manos de determinados linajes y faltos de todo criterio militar a la hora de su provisión.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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".