MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610434478 · doi:10.15645/alabe2017.15.11

¿Es el escribir un diario un fármacon?

2017· article· es· W2610434478 on OpenAlexaff
Luis A. Branda

Bibliographic record

VenueAlabe Revista de Investigación sobre Lectura y Escritura · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational theories and practices
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumen Tras un prolongado intercambio epistolar entre dos docentes universitarios (Branda, 2015; 2016), la relación afectuosa ha sido terminada por una de los correspondientes. En este escrito se presentan las entradas en el diario de Alberto, el otro correspondiente, donde se incluyen reflexiones relacionadas a Henri–Frédéric Amiel y referencias a los comentarios sobre su psicología que la lectura de su Journal intime ha generado en varios escritores, incluyendo Gregorio Marañón. También se menciona un aspecto de la vida de Amiel que parece haber recibido menos atención, que es su rol como docente. El diario finaliza con comentarios sobre las aspiraciones del diarista con reflexiones sobre el pasado y la incertidumbre del futuro.

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)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.321 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueAlabe Revista de Investigación sobre Lectura y EscrituraSame topicEducational theories and practicesFrench-language works237,207