MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566482535 · doi:10.3828/catr.30.4

TOT BARCELONA: <i>FIN DE SIÈCLE</i> XVIII, SEGONS UNA FAMÍLIA DE MANUSCRITS LITERARIS DE NOVA YORK I MADRID

2016· article· ca· W2566482535 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Brown, JUAN MANUEL MARTÍNEZ ALONSO

Bibliographic record

VenueCatalan Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageca
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Architecture Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtNova (rocket)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a critical sampling of twenty-four verse excerpts contained in the Hispanic Society of America’s manuscript HC380/632, Poesies vàries, as well as in Biblioteca Nacional de España (BNE) ms. 1595. Both manuscript collections, combined with a third, BNE ms. 1595bis, offer an exemplary and rather complete collection of Catalan- and Spanish-language poetry indicative of the late rococo in Barcelona and environs. Of special note is a staunch and repeated defense of the Catalan language and typical customs, a critical commentary on the Barcelona industrialist Joan Canaleta, satirical barbs aimed at the Catholic Church’s covetousness, an acute sense of modernity, both in discourse and subject matter, and precise geographical points on the map of late eighteenth-century Barcelona, all of which lead us directly back to the Raval district and the current Institut d’Estudis Catalans. These three aforementioned, long ignored-poetry collections afford the reader valuable insights into the society that populated the city of Barcelona at the time. In so doing, they provide literary scholars, lexicographers, and historians more than a thousand pages of fresh new verse with countless bits of information and lexical forms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatalan ReviewSame topicHistorical Art and Architecture StudiesFrench-language works237,207