The Safeguard of Carimbó: pathways to implementing a participatory public policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O presente trabalho foi desenvolvido no formato de Dissertação de Mestrado apresentada ao Programa de Pós-Graduação Stricto Sensu em Diversidade Sociocultural do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, compondo a linha de pesquisa de Cultura e Patrimônio. Propõe-se apresentar aspectos sobre a historicidade da manifestação cultural do Carimbó do Estado do Pará, bem como compreender as transformações discursivas a partir dos usos do termo “Carimbozeiro”, através da relação explícita entre indivíduo-natureza, compreendendo esta, como fundamental para a formação de identidade desse grupo social, associada a perspectiva de caboclo na Amazônia. Analisa-se esses processos, como caminhos para uma formação identitária que se traduzem na luta e organização política desses indivíduos pela garantia de direitos, decorrente do registro do Carimbó como Patrimônio Cultural Imaterial Brasileiro. Ressalta-se a importância de se buscar compreender o processo de afirmação de populações subalternas, daqueles que historicamente foram colocados à margem do modelo colonial da sociedade, destacando as suas complexas formas de estrutura social e organização política.
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 | 0.031 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".