Instituciones y políticas de desarrollo económico: Comunidades Ojibway y cree en Manitoba Canadá Vs. Nassa-Páez del norte del Cauca en Colombia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existen diferencias entre los factores que hacen parte de la matriz institucional (reglas formales, informales, mitos leyendas y mecanismos de refuerzo) para las comunidades indígenas Nasa-Páez del Norte del Cauca de Colombia y comunidades indígenas Ojibway y Cree de Manitoba Canadá; dichas diferencias están enmarcadas en las reglas formales de estas comunidades, tomando como argumento que en Colombia la Constitución Política les proporciona el derecho a un autogobierno; mientras que en Canadá, las comunidades indígenas se rigen por las leyes federales y provinciales; en Colombia hay menores posibilidades económicas para las comunidades en estudio comparadas por las oportunidades que ofrece Canadá para sus comunidades. Como similitud se encuentra el gran respeto que dichas comunidades manifiestan por sus mitos y leyendas, la presencia de un chaman en las respectivas comunidades y la posibilidad de que cada una de las comunidades cuenten con un territorio propio exento de impuesto, lo cual se cumple en ambos países
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".