MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765480068 · doi:10.1386/slac.14.2.153_1

The institutionalization of film exhibition in Cuba (1959–64)

2017· article· en· W2765480068 on OpenAlexaff
Irene Rozsa

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Spanish & Latin-American Cinemas · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionInstitutionalisationScrutinyClubPolitical scienceScale (ratio)SociologyAestheticsMedia studiesArtArt historyLawGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article charts the gradual institutionalization of film exhibition in Cuba and the process of centralization that cemented ICAIC’s predominance in the Cuban cinematographic landscape. I examine the transformation of the notion of cine club, the creation of large-scale initiatives like the cine-debates populares (popular cinedebates), the strategic conception of regular film programming and the establishment of specialized spaces such as ICAIC’s cinemathèque. I also contextualize the frictions between various cultural groups that existed in the early post-revolutionary period. This close scrutiny of aspects of non-commercial film culture in the years 1959 to 1964 reveals that in order to thrive, ICAIC effectively suppressed, absorbed or repurposed all of the pre-revolutionary material infrastructure and institutional formations dedicated to film on the island, obtaining increasingly exclusive control over the films that were shown on public screens.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Spanish & Latin-American CinemasSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207