Escenarios prospectivos para el desarrollo integral del Purús al 2040
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CAPTULO 1: INTRODUCCIN 3.8.2.Horizonte temporal del estudio prospectivo La propuesta del ao 2040, como horizonte temporal en el estudio prospectivo para el territorio de Purs obedece a las siguientes consideraciones: 3.8.3.Identificacin y vinculacin de expertos 3.8.4.Identificacin de variables prospectivas y medicin de relaciones 3.8.5.Anlisis de mega tendencias (Instrumento 4) 3.8.6.Anlisis de datos 3.8.7.Anlisis Estructural y determinacin de las variables claves 3.8.9.Juego de actores 3.8.10.Construccin de escenarios prospectivos 3.8.11.Hiptesis prospectivas.Identificacin y formulacin CAPTULO 4: RESULTADOS Y DISCUSIN 4.1.Resultados y discusin de la fase cualitativa 4.1.1.Diagnstico estratgico del territorio de Purs 4.1.2.Identificacin de las tecnologas convergentes 4.1.3.Influencia de los servicios de educacin, salud y comercio en el desarrollo integral de Purs.4.1.4.Construccin de los cuatro escenarios prospectivos con mayor probabilidad de ocurrencia 4.2.
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 | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".