Implicancias de un continentalismo crítico: un ensayo sobre los ensayos en torno al Pan y el Latinoamericanismo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay starts with a brief critical study of the aspects assumed in the definition of a "critical Latin-American continentalism" as it had been proposed by The Canadian Association for Latin American and Caribbean Studies (CALACS) during the year 2015. This critical review goes from historical elements and precisions to worldviews and socio-politic orders linked with the different names put on the "American" and "Latin-American" continentalisms from canonical essays of Spanish American Literature. For "continentalism" I mean any political and cultural project whose main ideal is to integrate each nation of the American continent or the Latin-American region into a big symbolic continental idea. As an aftermath of this critical review, I identify some critical aspects that we need to keep in mind as when we propose a political Latin-Americanism as when we use any of the different "isms" used to refer this part of America. For this last goal, I study briefly some social and cultural features of the José Vasconcelos' Latinamericanism as examples of the dangers and key differences implied in each continentalism project desired.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".