Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumen: La insistencia de Ángel González en la lectura del poema como previa a cualquier comentario implica una asimilación de lo leído, producto de una larga convivencia con los poemas, que es la única vía que lleva a la comprensión. Si el ámbito de lo poético debe extenderse a toda la experiencia verbal, pues lo que caracteriza a la palabra poética es su poder de encarnación, aquello que hace posible la crítica sobre poesía, mucho más intensa que la novelística o la dramática, no es el intento de establecer grados y jerarquías en la valoración de la obra estudiada, sino de estimular la participación del lector en la obra poética, manteniendo siempre su autonomía.Palabras clave: Ángel González; convivencia; asimilación; lectura; autonomía.Abstract: The insistence of Ángel González on the reading of the poem as prior to any comment implies an assimilation of the read, product of a long coexistence with the poems, which is the only way that leads to understanding. If the scope of the poetic must be extended to the entire verbal experience, since what characterizes the poetic word is its power of incarnation, that which makes poetry criticism possible, much more intense than novelistic or dramatic, is not the attempt to establish degrees and hierarchies in the evaluation of the work studied, but, on the contrary, to stimulate the participation of the reader in the poetic work, always maintaining its autonomy.Key-words: Ángel González; coexistence; assimilation; reading; autonomy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".