Promoción de la cooperación técnica y económica entre Africa y América Latina: ciencia y tecnología = Promotion of technical and economic co-operation between Africa and Latin America in the field of science and technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One last remark.concerning the inclusion in the present study ofColombia and the Board of the Cartagena Agreement, in addition to the five countries -Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Peru and Trinidad and Tobagooriginally selected...As regards Colombia, the main motive was interest in adducing the experience of one of the most important centres of technology appropriate to the region -if not the most important-, i.e., the Centro Las Gaviotas, as well as that existing in the country's scientific and technological development centres and that acquired in the course of several years of control and transfer of technology from abroad.With respect to the Andean Group, the decisive inducement to its inclusion lay in the so-called Andean Technological Development Projects (Proyectos Andinos! de Desarrollo Technolgico -PADT, which are sectoral development strategies with a substantial scientific and technological content, and which it is considered may be of interest to the African countries, as, for instance, in the case of the well-known and important action taken by the subregional agreement.inthis sphere of science and technology.I.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".