Agricultura familiar e Previd??ncia Social rural :\num estudo comparativo em quatro munic??pios ga??chos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A disserta????o analisa a import??ncia da previd??ncia social rural na din??mica da agricultura familiar ga??cha. Aborda os efeitos do processo de universaliza????o da seguridade social em face das mudan??as decorrentes da promulga????o da nova\nconstitui????o de 1988. O estudo desenvolveu-se com base em pesquisa realizada em 238 estabelecimentos rurais existentes em quatro ??reas de estudo correspondentes ??s microrregi??es de Pelotas, Caxias do Sul, Frederico Westphalen e Cerro Largo,\nrespectivamente situadas no sul, nordeste, norte e noroeste da geografia ga??cha.\nOs resultados indicam que as aposentadorias e pens??es s??o essencialmente importantes na perspectiva da redu????o das desigualdades. Elas representam uma importante fonte de renda para as fam??lias e para a economia dos munic??pios. Foi\ncomprovada a tese de estes recursos s??o igualmente importantes para financiar as atividades agropecu??rias em uma propor????o consider??vel (53%) no conjunto dos\nestabelecimentos investigados. Al??m disso, a pesquisa analisou a evolu????o do n??mero e valor das aposentadorias e pens??es rurais durante os anos 2001 e 2006 nas quatro microrregi??es aludidas. Se a d??cada de 1990 mostra uma expans??o substancial no sistema, nos seis primeiros anos do s??culo XXI reduzem-se as taxas de incremento no n??mero de aposentados e pensionistas no Estado do Rio Grande\ndo Sul. Esse dado ?? importante na medida em que contraria algumas posi????es que insistem na necessidade de rever a forma de concess??o de benef??cios ?? clientela\nrural, por conta do incremento no n??mero de aposentados e pensionistas, tend??ncia esta que n??o se viu confirmada no marco dessa pesquisa.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".