MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408300245 · doi:10.15517/es.v43i1-2.28792

El cine latinoamericano: del código realista al código postmoderno

2017· article· es· W2408300245 on OpenAlexaff
Albino Chacón, Gastón Lillo

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCinema History and Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumen: En el cine latinoamericano pueden distinguirse cuatro periodos. El primero va de los anos 30 a los 60, caracterizado por los melodramas y las cabareteras. El segundo periodo corresponde a los anos 60, con un cine comprometido politica y socialmente, de denuncia, que se concibe como un arma cultural para la transformacion social. Este segundo periodo finaliza en los anos 70 con los golpes de estado. En el cine de la decada de los 70 la problematica latinoamericana recibe un tratamiento mas intimista. El nuevo cine comienza a privilegiar nuevos espacios, como las contradicciones familiares y el humor toma un papel preponderante. El cuarto periodo del cine latinoamericano es el que se esta haciendo hoy. Los cineastas manifiestan un fuerte pesimismo, acompanado de un humor corrosivo. Es un cine que tiene en comun la incorporacion de lo ludico y una caida casi total del principio de impresion de realidad. Hay tambien producciones dentro del genero biografico o documental, pero la influencia de una estetica posmodema se ha hecho sentir fuertemente, con todas sus consecuencias formales e ideologicas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicCinema History and CriticismFrench-language works237,207