Rereading "Rayuela": Hypergraphy, Hermaphrodism, and Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este art?culo es un an?lisis de la teor?a de lectura y que propone Rayuela. Primero, critica y desconstruye las teor?as mis?ginas de lectura que aparentemente postula la novela y se enfoca en aspectos estructurales que evocan a un hermafrodita, t?rmino que definimos en nuestro an?lisis. Fragmentado ya el g?nero lector, su subjetividad y racionalidad tambi?n se pulverizan y se hacen esquizofr?nicas. Se reconoce en Oliveira, pues, la figura del lector esquizoide, err?tico, n?mada, un misreader irreverente a categor?as fijas (inclusive la categor?a de lector/a), aficcionado a peripecias y viajes literales o literarios en un constante cruzar de fronteras petrificadas. Es una figura de excesivo, incapaz de reconocerse a s? mismo. Esta interpretaci?n nos dirige a la consideraci?n de una escritura hiperb?lica que llamamos hipergraf?a: a) en el sentido de la discontinua, no lineal, incongruente, a trav?s de la cual se puede relacionar a Rayuela con el hipertexto (sin confluir?a con ello); b) en el sentido de una hip er como exceso, interrupci?n o s?ncopa de las categor?as, oposiciones y jerarqu?as problem?ticas que la novela parece establecer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".