MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749758748 · doi:10.5206/entrehojas.v7i1.6172

El debate realista español: apuntes de Galdós, Clarín y Bazán sobre la fórmula para reproducir la realidad

2017· article· es· W2749758748 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marta del Pozo Ortea

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrehojas Revista de Estudios Hispánicos · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSpanish Literature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A lo largo del s. XIX y a principios del s. XX se desarrolla un animado debate sobre lo que se entiende por “realismo”. Desde Zola y su teorización de la novela experimental, a Galdós con su declaración de que “no tenemos novela;” desde Auberbach y su “mimesis,” a Lukacs con su defensa de la novela histórica, hay un obvio afán de definir cuál es la forma más apropriada para reproducir lo real en un texto de ficción. En estas páginas se explican y problematizan las coordenadas de dicho debate, insertándolo en la producción realista española.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0110.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 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 venueEntrehojas Revista de Estudios HispánicosSame topicSpanish Literature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207