Jules Verne y la ciencia en la prensa española del siglo XIX
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En el siglo xix, Jules Verne, desde la publicación del primer Viaje Extraordinario, fue un novelista con mucha repercusión mediática en la prensa española. Cualquier motivo era importante e interesante para incluir una información en los periódicos. A través de una serie de noticias siempre relacionadas con Verne y sus novelas, en este artículo me propongo presentar cómo la prensa española presentó su perfil y la forma en que los lectores tuvieron acceso, por medio de los periódicos y revistas, a la figura de Verne y la visión que de él se trasmitió.In the nineteenth century, after publishing his first Extraordinay Journey, Jules Verne became widely popular as a novelist in the Spanish press. No matter whether the contemporary news on Verne was truly important or of significant interest to the readers, any information about him was invariably considered relevant and turned into newspapers headlines. By focusing on a series of news exclusively related to Verne’s career as a writer as well as to his own novels, in this paper I intend to discuss how Verne’s profile was defined at that time by the Spanish press and the specific ways in which Verne’s public image and popularity were dealt with.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".