MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2191981247

El Hermano Uiises en el Sur Profundo según los Hermanos Coen

2007· article· es· W2191981247 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eugenia Flores de Molinillo

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2007
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCinema History and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El filme ¿Dónde estás, hermano? (2000), de Joel y Ethan Coen, es una reescrituradel mito clásico de mises recogido por Homero en La Odisea, trasladado al así llamado"Sur Profundo" de los Estados Unidos --el estado de Mississipi-, y narrado en clave decomedia, explotando la intertextualidad como uno de los recursos cómicos más eficaces.El periplo del héroe, mysses Everett McGill quien, acompañado por otros dos convictos,ha huido de la cárcel, transcurre durante la Gran Depresión, y las referencias históricas alos años veinte incluyen la desastrosa situación del agro, el auge del delito y el racismoimperante, observado todo ello con una lente humorística. El relato fílmico conserva laestructura episódica del hipotexto, adecuando situaciones y personajes a la peculiar"mitología" sureña. El desplazamiento de la historia clásica puede observarse en lossiguientes niveles: a) de género; b) cronotópico; e) actancial; d) semántico. Las inteligentesestrategias de desplazamiento, configuración, imbricación de lo musical conlo verbal,elaboración del guión y -no por último menos importante- la brillante composiciónde los personajes, ameritan una mirada seria a este mises sureño, no demasiado exitosoen sus emprendimientos, pero tan "fecundo en recursos" como su tocayo de Ítaca.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.000

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicCinema History and CriticismFrench-language works237,207