normas APA : guía práctica para la elaboración de citas y referencias según los estilos APA, Vancouver e ICONTEC 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Esta guía tiene como finalidad orientar de modo práctico y simple a los estudiantes en sus labores académicas de citación y referenciación en sus trabajos académicos; unifica los esfuerzos previos de las facultades para contar con un único instructivo que facilite la implementación de las normas APA, Vancouver o Icontec ¿según corresponda¿ en los trabajos solicitados en el desarrollo de las labores académicas. Es un documento de consulta, en el que el usuario podrá acceder desde la Tabla de Contenidos a su necesidad particular, ya sea citar un libro, artículo científico, entrevista o video ¿por mencionar algunos ejemplos¿, y así implementar su fuente consultada debidamente. Las ediciones de los estilos de citación y referencia incluídos indican que esta guía será actualizada conforme lo exijan las convenciones académicas
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.020 |
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".