MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1529898692 · doi:10.5206/entrehojas.v4i1.6152

“Contra el hartazgo de lo real, pero partiendo de él: el gozne sobre el que pivotan la ‘Patafísica y la Literatura Fantástica” Entrevista al escritor de relatos literarios Ángel Olgoso

2014· article· es· W1529898692 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lidia Morales Benito

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrehojas Revista de Estudios Hispánicos · 2014
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComparative Literary Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtNarrativeAsidePhilosophyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En la siguiente entrevista, el escritor Ángel Olgoso nos habla sobre su particular percepción de la realidad circundante y el proceso de escritura meticuloso gracias al cual esa extrañeza con la que mira al mundo puede convertirse en relato literario pues, como él mismo explica “en sus libros, el lector encontrará relatos fronterizos de la realidad, el sueño y la pesadilla; hechos cotidianos contados como sucesos asombrosos y hechos extraños y desaforados contados como sucesos corrientes”. Sus reflexiones acerca de lo fantástico se unen a su labor como fundador del Institutum Pataphysicum Granatensis, donde la ciencia de las excepciones estudia la norma fallida; así, Ángel Olgoso se aventura a explicar el concepto de `Patafísica, sin dejar de lado la intuición de lo inexplicable. In the following interview writer Ángel Olgoso talks about his own perception of surrounding reality and about his meticulous writing process. The latter allows the strangeness of his views to turn into literary narratives. As he explains, “in my books, readers will find narratives bordering on actuality, dreams and nightmares; everyday fact is told as if it were a marvelous happening, while the strange and the lawless, as if normal.” His reflections on the fantastic are part of his work as founder of the Institutum Pataphysicum Granatensis, where the science of exceptions studies the failure of normality. Thus, Ángel Olgoso explains the concept of ‘Pataphysics without leaving aside the intuition of the inexplicable.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0100.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntrehojas Revista de Estudios HispánicosSame topicComparative Literary Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207