MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1008516682

From Clot to Collapse: Two Approaches to Reading in Cortázar's "62. Modelo para armar"

2001· article· es· W1008516682 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Todd Alan Price

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Canadiense de Estudios Hispánicos · 2001
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLatin American Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Varios cr?ticos han se?alado la importancia del primer episodio de 62. Modelo para armar como clave para interpretar la novela. Seg?n ellos, el intento por parte de Juan de entender y recrear su momento de claridad lo que Cort?zar llama un co?gulo sirve como ejemplo para el lector de la novela. El lector, como Juan en un caf? en Par?s, se enfrenta con una serie de elementos que tienen que ser armados dentro del mismo contexto para que produzcan un sentido. Proponemos que, mientras que este m?todo de interpretaci?n tiene validez, existe otro modelo de lectura en el episodio de la violaci?n de Celia por H?l?ne. La interpretaci?n que implica este episodio produce una imagen de la novela tan sobrecargada de sentido que procura el caos.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Canadiense de Estudios HispánicosSame topicLatin American Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207