MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948649000 · doi:10.25094/rtp.2015n18a411

O escudo de Aquiles

2015· article· pt· W2948649000 on OpenAlexaff
Jamesson Buarque de Souza, Gustavo Ponciano Cunha de Oliveira

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Texto Poético · 2015
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, Trauma, and Testimony
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artigo parte da representação da poesia anterior aos poemas homéricos como tentativa de localizar a origem da poesia lírica. As fontes são fragmentos dos próprios poemas homéricos e alguns registros historiográficos da História da Literatura, que se valem também de dados propiciados pela Arqueologia e pela Antropologia. Neles, esta “poesia original” está vinculada ao ritualístico, ao mágico, ao religioso. Segundo Hauser, haveria profissionais da palavra mágica, cuja origem é o artista-mago pré-histórico. No texto homérico, o divino aedo surge enigmaticamente cercado por dançarinos. Ao longo dos 136 versos da Ilíada que descrevem o escudo de Aquiles forjado por Hefesto, há trechos nos quais os cantos que embalam as danças não são executados por aedos especialistas, como Fêmio e Demódoco. A dança é também vinculada à poesia no grupo de artes que dispensam tékhne apresentado por Platão no Íon. Para Vernant, as formas de expressão que, unidas, dão origem à religião grega são o mito (evento fundamental para o estabelecimento da literatura, segundo Lesky), o rito (vinculado à dança) e a representação figurada. Os indícios, por fim, apontam para a existência de outra poesia que não a épica homérica e de concepções do poeta diversas daquela acerca do aedo especialista.Palavras-chave: Poesia pré-homérica. Historiografia. Homero.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.004

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Texto PoéticoSame topicMemory, Trauma, and TestimonyFrench-language works237,207