MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028960425

Gouverner les campagnes Analyse micro-sociale et construction institutionnelle (Río de la Plata, fin du XVIIIe siècle)

2018· article· fr· W7028960425 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueConicet · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Context (archaeology)Clientelism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À la fin du xviiie siècle, la monarchie hispanique imagina de nouvelles solutions pour gouverner ses territoires compris entre le Sud de l’Amazonie, le détroit de Magellan et la cordillère andine. Peuplées de cultivateurs et d’éleveurs, ces immenses régions rurales restaient mal connues des autorités. Pourtant, parmi les réformes conduites en Amérique par Charles III – notamment l’adoption du système de l’intendance –, aucune n’abordait de front l’administration des campagnes, une question importante pour deux raisons. Premièrement, la majeure partie des habitants du Río de la Plata vivait à la campagne. Deuxièmement, les longues distances séparant ces territoires des villes où étaient fixées les représentants du pouvoir monarchique (Santa Fe, Buenos Aires ou Madrid) constituaient un défi de taille pour les autorités chargées de gouverner ces populations. L’abandon d’une analyse surplombante au profit d’une approche au ras du sol, attentive aux dynamiques locales, permet d’éclairer le fonctionnement de ces espaces éloignés des centres politiques de la monarchie. À travers une analyse microhistorique d’une série de transformations institutionnelles survenues dans la province du Río de la Plata, cet article montre comment des individus gouvernés réussirent à prendre part au gouvernement de leur territoire. La mobilisation de leurs réseaux leur permit de créer des institutions et une communauté politique locale.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConicetSame topicHistorical and Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207