MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779200836 · doi:10.18192/rceh.v41i2.2157

¿Qué hacer con los muertos? Claudia Hernández y el trabajo del duelo en la postguerra salvadoreña

2017· article· es· W2779200836 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ignacio Sarmiento

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Canadiense de Estudios Hispánicos · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El presente artículo explora el trabajo del duelo en la literatura salvadoreña contemporánea. Para esto, se presta especial atención al cuento “Hechos de un buen ciudadano” (Partes I y II) de Claudia Hernández. Se propone que el trabajo del duelo en la literatura salvadoreña de postguerra puede entenderse como un proceso inconcluso, el cual busca oponerse a los esfuerzos oficiales de “sanar las heridas del pasado” y rearticular la comunidad nacional. Así, el duelo inacabado, como lo presenta Hernández, se convierte en una demanda de justicia por los crímenes cometidos por el Estado. Palabras claves: El Salvador, Claudia Hernández, postguerra, duelo This article explores the task of mourning in contemporary Salvadoran literature with special attention to Claudia Hernández’s short story “Hechos de un buen ciudadano” (Parts I and II). It posits that the task of mourning in postwar Salvadoran fiction may be understood as an unfinished process that seeks to challenge the official aims of “healing the wounds of the past” and restore the national community. Therefore, the incomplete task of mourning, as Hernández presents it, becomes a demand for justice for the crimes committed by the State. Keywords: El Salvador, Claudia Hernández, postwar, mourning

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Canadiense de Estudios HispánicosSame topicLatin American Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207