Bibliographic record
Abstract
El presente artículo trata la relación entre el teatro y el cine, en particular del vínculo que se establece cuando una sustancia narrativa, una fábula, concebida para su materialización sobre la escena, es llevada a la pantalla. Efectuamos el examen desde lo que se llama el “eje de pertinencia intermedial”, esto es que consideramos que lo sensible determina lo inteligible y que las condiciones materiales se encuentran en el centro de todo análisis. De ello se desprende que la diferencia mediática resulta determinante en la generación de sentido. Nuestra discusión es de orden teórico, sin que por ello se renuncie a los ejemplos puntuales, principalmente provenientes de la cinematografía. La exposición se desarrolla en dos momentos: la primera parte se dedica a la noción de adaptación y al abordaje intermedial del fenómeno, la transescritura; la segunda se consagra a la relación entre el teatro y el cine, y a los rasgos a tomar en cuenta al analizar los procesos adaptativos.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".