MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1729937791

El mito del Cadejo en obras escogidas de Miguel Ángel Asturiasy Manlio Argueta

2005· article· es· W1729937791 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDialnet (Universidad de la Rioja) · 2005
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComparative Literary Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyConsciencePower (physics)HumanitiesSociologyDeceptionEconomic JusticeEthnologyEnvironmental ethicsArtPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawLiteratureEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Las visiones opuestas que tienen Asturias y Argueta acerca de los Cadejos (seres mitológicos de Centroamérica) reflejan dos aspectos del mismo mito: el Cadejo malo y el Cadejo bueno. El Cadejo malo, que roba la confianza a los seres humanos y les inspira terror, refleja las enfermedades de una sociedad basada en el engaño y la explotación. El Cadejo bueno encarna el espíritu regenerador de la naturaleza. El presente artículo compara la significación literaria del Cadejo malo de Asturias (que se asocia con rituales sanguinarios precolombinos, la Iglesia Católica tradicional, las dictaduras militares opresivas y la intervención extranjera) con el Cadejo bueno de Argueta, asociado con la confianza, la justicia, y la revolución social.

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.

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, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · 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