Adaptación del método DEMIT al contexto mexicano: Identificación de elementos a reformular para su aplicación eficaz.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El método DEMIT (Desarrollo Energético por Modelización e Inteligencia Territorial) fue implementado para dar respuesta a las solicitudes de los ciudadanos de Quebec, Canadá, de transparencia y de participación en la toma de decisión para la puesta en marcha de parques eólicos. DEMIT articula dos métodos multicriterio: la Ayuda a la Decisión Multicriterio (ADMC) y los Sistemas de Información Geográfica (SIG) colaborativos y participativos. Dichas herramientas multicriterio proveen a los tomadores de decisión de un conjunto de condiciones que permitirán una toma de decisión transparente y participativa durante la implantación de un parque eólico. Este método fue objeto de un caso de estudio, entre 2010 y 2011, de un parque eólico en operación en Quebec. En 2012, gracias a un financiamiento para un proyecto bilateral Quebec-México, se realizó una primera y somera adaptación al contexto mexicano, en donde se identificaron algunos elementos que deben reformularse para su aplicación eficaz en México. Dichos elementos se presentan en esta comunicación.
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 | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".