Bibliographic record
Abstract
Esta sesión muestra un trabajo que fue realizado durante un cierto tiempo previo alrededor del paisaje lingüístico del tehuelche. Se trata de la exhibición de la lengua, sobretodo con usos comerciales, en algunos lugares de la Patagonia, como Bariloche, Río Gallegos, El Calafate, Villa Tehuelches, Piedrabuena, Puerto Natales. La idea original fue de recorrer junto a Dora la ciudad de Río Gallegos y tratar de entender este uso exhibido de la lengua, y si tiene algún sentido lo que está escrito, porque por lo general las referencias que se usaron son incorrectas. Problemas de organización hicieron que esa tarea quedara diluida en los otros videos, y nos llevaron a esta versión final que fue grabada en la cocina de Dora Manchado con ayuda de imágenes vistas en la pantalla de una computadora. Quien conduce la sesión es Nicolas Duval, estudiante de antropología que conocía poco el castellano. Es un ejemplo interesante que muestra claramente lo difícil que es preparar una sesión de este tipo, y la comunidad de práctica que se había establecido entre yo, Javier Domingo, y Dora Manchado. En la sesión mostramos a Dora algunas palabras escritas en tehuelche, pero Dora no sabía leer, y se basaba entonces sólo en la imagen. Curiosamente, ella no sabía que existía este uso de su lengua. En la mayoría de los ejemplos, un uso completamente equivocado. Como por lo general los que usan estas palabras son comercios, aprovechamos la sesión para preguntarle sobre los nombres de comercio en tehuelche. Contamos también una anécdota de un viaje al Cañadón cuando nos prohibieron la entrada, y discutimos sobre la propiedad de la lengua. This session shows the work that was done around the Tehuelche linguistic landscape. It is about the exhibition of the language with commercial uses in some places of Patagonia such as Bariloche, Río Gallegos, El Calafate, Villa Tehuelches, Piedrabuena, Puerto Natales – mostly touristic attractions. The original idea was to travel with Dora through the city of Río Gallegos and try to understand this exhibited use of the language, and if it actually makes any sense what is written because usually, the references that were used are incorrect. Organizational problems made it impossible, but we still have references to particular examples in some other sessions. This final version was recorded in Dora Manchado's kitchen with the help of images seen on a computer screen. The conductor of the session is Nicolas Duval, an anthropology student (University of Montreal) who knew little Spanish. It is an interesting example that clearly shows how difficult it is to prepare a session of this type, and the community of practice that had been established between me, Javier Domingo, and Dora Manchado. In the session, we showed Dora some words written in Tehuelche, but Dora could not read. Interestingly, she did not know that this use of her language existed. In most of the examples, a completely wrong use. As usually those who use these words are shops, we took advantage of the session to ask about shop names in Tehuelche. We also told an anecdote about a trip to the Cañadón when we were banned from entering, and we discussed the ownership of the language.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.073 | 0.017 |
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".