The written document and the royal seal in the Indies: the use of the document as a power strategy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El documento escrito y, muy especialmente, el sello real han si-do instrumentos utilizados por los reyes para comunicar y difundir a sus súbditos los más diversos negocios y voluntades. Empleados desde an-tiguo para garantizar y probar obligaciones o privilegios, los documen-tos reales y su principal signo de validación, el sello, también fueron usados para expandir la jurisdicción regia y fortalecer la soberanía del monarca. El recurso del documento como estrategia de poder se intensi-ficó en la misma proporción que lo hizo la propia Monarquía y el terri-torio sobre el que quería ejercer su autoridad. Este hecho explica que en las Indias, gobernada durante siglos en permanente ausencia del monar-ca, el documento escrito y el sello adquieran un mayor protagonismo a la hora de representar la jurisdicción regia y la presencia simbólica del monarca. Este estudio pretende reflexionar sobre los usos y funciones dadas al documento y al sello real como prolongación de la jurisdicción real y su poder en tan lejanos territorios.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".