Comerciantes, cofrades y burócratas \nLos mayordomos de Nuestra Señora de Aránzazu y Nuestra Señora del Rosario. Lima, 1700-1750
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La presente tesis tiene como problema de investigación ¿en qué medida las cofradías \nfueron espacios de sociabilidad que permitieron y promovieron la aparición de redes políticas \ncuyo fin primordial fue empoderar a diversos comerciantes que se encontraban en plena carrera \nde ascenso social? En efecto, en esta investigación se propone que las cofradías no solo eran \nespacios de devoción y culto, sino también vehículos de prestigio y poder, debido a que \nfavorecían la sociabilidad y convivencia permitiendo que sus integrantes estrecharan y \nreforzaran los vínculos sociales que los unían, condicionando así la aparición y articulación de \nredes políticas. Por ello, esta investigación no es un trabajo tradicional sobre las cofradías en las \nque prima la generalidad y el anonimato; por el contrario, se desentrañan las redes políticas de estas corporaciones.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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".