MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613743230

La memoria en los márgenes: la literatura testimonial concentracionaria de Nora Strejilevich escrita desde el exilio

2016· article· es· W2613743230 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paula Simón

Bibliographic record

VenueGramma · 2016
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, violence, and history
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesTestimonialArtPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El articulo se propone hacer un aporte al estudio de un tipo de escritura con frecuencia marginada y marginal: la literatura testimonial concentracionaria argentina, es decir, aquellos textos escritos por supervivientes de los campos de concentracion o centros de detencion clandestinos de la ultima dictadura militar argentina (1976-1983), en los que estos sujetos relatan su propia experiencia traumatica. El estudio parte de la idea de que las memorias de la violencia totalitaria en diversos contextos socio-culturales tienen una instancia significativa de construccion en el exilio y, por esta razon, ocupan un espacio marginal. Otra causa de dicha marginalidad se observa en el hecho de que una porcion importante de los discursos producidos por los testigos se definen como «testimonio», un genero que todavia presenta problemas de definicion y especificidad en el ambito de la critica literaria. Se analizaran dos textos de Nora Strejilevich, ex-secuestrada y exiliada en Canada y Estados Unidos: Una sola muerte numerosa (1997) y El arte de no olvidar (2006). Ya sea desde el testimonio, como en el primer caso, o desde la reflexion teorica sobre el mismo, como en el segundo, estos textos contribuiran a la discusion que se abre en torno a la literatura testimonial concentracionaria argentina de los ultimos anos.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.664

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.014
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGrammaSame topicMemory, violence, and historyFrench-language works237,207