MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949509165 · doi:10.36829/63chs.v2i2.133

El viaje de Beatriz -La Sin Ventura-, en la mirada feminista de Alaíde Foppa

2015· article· es· W2949509165 on OpenAlexaff
Carmen Miranda Barrios

Bibliographic record

VenueCiencias Sociales y Humanidades · 2015
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural and Social Studies in Latin America
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En el presente trabajo se presenta parte del análisis al corpus del poema épico La Sin Ventura (1955), escrito por Alaíde Foppa. Este texto se enmarca dentro del género literario de relato de viajes durante la colonia al llamado “Nuevo Mundo”. El interés en su estudio radica en que tanto la escritora como la protagonista de esta obra son figuras históricas importantes para Guatemala, pero poco conocidas o estudiadas. Por un lado, Foppa, académica, poeta, crítica de arte, exiliada, productora de radio y desparecida presuntamente por el ejército guatemalteco en los años 80, fue precursora del feminismo latinoamericano y defensora de los Derechos Humanos. Por el otro, Beatriz de la Cueva fue la esposa del conquistador Pedro de Alvarado y primera gobernadora de la Capitanía General de Guatemala en 1541. En La Sin Ventura, Alaíde Foppa decide recrear la imagen de Beatriz de la Cueva, esposa del conquistador Pedro de Alvarado. Los cronistas Francisco Antonio Fuentes y Guzmán, Fray Antonio de Remesal y Bernal Díaz del Castillo mencionan muy brevemente a la esposa del conquistador en sus escritos. Sin embargo, Foppa utiliza a este personaje histórico como protagonista principal de este poema épico, enmarcado en la Guatemala colonial.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCiencias Sociales y HumanidadesSame topicCultural and Social Studies in Latin AmericaFrench-language works237,207