Bibliographic record
Abstract
El texto parte de problematizar la importancia de los valores en la actividad científica. A partir de una perspectiva socio-histórica y constructivista se realiza un recorrido con el fin de mostrar la manera en que los valores que se construyen en el seno de las comunidades científicas, son fuertemente influenciados por el entorno económico, político, social y cultural, así como por los compromisos, intereses y preferencias demostrados por los hombres y mujeres de ciencia, quienes, en distintos momentos y lugares, establecen condiciones que posibilitan, determinan o impulsan la construcción de dichos valores. Se pone en evidencia la naturaleza transformacional de dichos valores, lo que nos lleva a la necesidad de que las comunidades científicas realicen una continua autoreflexibidad para que, de manera crítica, y con un compromiso ético-político analicen las condiciones socio-históricas que los han llevado a construir los valores que imperan en sus comunidades, así como los escenarios posibles y deseables para su transformación
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".