Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolLas relaciones entre la literatura popular y la culta son muy frecuentes en la historia literaria, como lo demuestran los ejemplos de Juan de Mena, Lope de Vega, Luis de Gongora, Gustavo Adolfo Becquer, Juan Ramon Jimenez..., y los trabajos teoricos de Mila y Fontanals, Benedetto Croce, Juan Valera, Menendez Pelayo, Menendez Pidal, etc. Con estos presupuestos, y atendiendo a los aspectos formales y expresivos, se analizan los elementos populares en las obras teatrales Quien te ha visto y quien te ve y sombra de lo que eras , El torero mas valiente , Los hijos de la piedra , El labrador de mas aire y Pastor de la muerte de Miguel Hernandez. EnglishRelations between popular and serious literature are very common in literary history, as evidenced by the examples of Juan de Mena, Lope de Vega, Luis de Gongora, Gustavo Adolfo Becquer, Juan Ramon Jimenez... and theoretical works of Mila and Fontanals, Benedetto Croce, Juan Valera, Menendez Pelayo, Menendez Pidal, etc. With these assumptions, and taking into account the formal and expressive aspects, popular elements are analyzed in the plays Quien te ha visto y quien te ve y sombra de lo que has sido El torero mas valiente , Los hijos de la piedra , El labrador de mas aire and Pastor de la muerte by Miguel Hernandez.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".