MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996547841 · doi:10.12957/polemica.2019.47377

INFORMAÇÃO PARA E PELOS SURDOS: SOBRE TRANSMISSÃO AUDIOVISUAL EM LIBRAS E DESENVOLVIMENTO DA CRITICIDADE

2019· article· pt· W2996547841 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuepolemica · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPopulationSociologyPolitical scienceArtDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumo: Cerca de 5% da população brasileira possui algum grau de perda de audição (IBGE, 2010). São dez milhões de brasileiros com dificuldades de acesso às informações sobre as realidades de seu país e do mundo, ao conhecimento sistematizado pelas ciências etc. Alguns programas audiovisuais recorrem a legendas em Português e/ou intérpretes da Língua Brasileira de Sinais – Libras, atuando nas chamadas “janelinhas”, sendo exceção os produzidos por profissionais surdos e apresentados por eles em primeiro plano na tela. Sob tal contexto de discussão, e partindo da premissa da formação humana ao longo da vida, este artigo apresenta uma problematização acerca das diferenças entre a transmissão de informações por surdos e por intérpretes a partir de pesquisa bibliográfica. O trabalho sugere que uma informação transmitida de surdo para surdo, em audiovisuais, estaria mais próxima ao conteúdo original da mensagem e ao universo linguístico e cultural das comunidades Surdas. Também expõe uma reflexão sobre a necessidade de ampliação do repertório informacional para o desenvolvimento (permanente) da consciência crítica (FREIRE, 1979) pelos surdos que anseiam “ser mais”.Palavras-chave: Surdez. Libras. Acesso à informação. Abstract: About 5% of the Brazilian population has some degree of hearing loss (IBGE, 2010). There are ten million Brazilians who have difficulty accessing information about the realities of their country and of the world, knowledge drawn up by the sciences, etc. Some audiovisual programs use Portuguese subtitles and/or Brazilian Sign Language interpreters (Libras) acting in their little "windows" as they are called, with the exception of those produced by deaf professionals and presented to them in the foreground of the screen. Under this context of discussion, and based on the premise of human lifelong training, this article presents an examination of the differences between the transmission of information by deaf people and by interpreters, based on bibliographic research. The paper points out that information transmitted from deaf to deaf in audiovisuals would be closer to the original content of the message, and to the linguistic and cultural universe of the deaf community. It also presents a reflection on the need to expand the informational repertoire for the (permanent) development of critical consciousness (FREIRE, 1979) by deaf people who yearn to "be more."Keywords: Deafness. Libras. Access to information.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.012

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.300 · 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