MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013444297

El “efecto Piranesi” de Thomas De Quincey como procedimiento ficcional en Borges

2019· article· es· W3013444297 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jerónimo Ledesma

Bibliographic record

VenueEstudios de Teoría Literaria - Revista digital: artes, letras y humanidades · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBorges, Kipling, and Jewish Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanticismMillerHEROContext (archaeology)SublimeArtRomanceQuarter (Canadian coin)Art historyHumanitiesPhilosophyLiteratureHistoryArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “Piranesi effect” is a special literary effect created in the first quarter of the Nineteenth Century to connect the representation of the human mind to the experience of the infinite in the context of the popularization of Romanticism in the new media of the 1820s, and as an instantiation of the aesthetic of the sublime. The invention took place in a fragment from Thomas De Quincey’s Confessions of an English Opium-Eater (1821), presenting a plate after the manner of Giovanni Battista Piranesi’s Carceri d’Invenzione that shows Piranesi himself as a delirious hero of his own architectonic imagination. The term “Piranesi effect” was coined in 1963, after this very same passage, by the Northamerican critic Hillis Miller as the name of a general device-experience in De Quincey’s work. More than a hundred years after De Quincey invented the effect, and twenty before Miller named it, Jorge Luis Borges introduced the Piranesi effect as a technique in his experiments in fiction of the 1940s in Argentina. For Borges, this romantic effect acquired the role of a literary weapon in the context of World War II. In this article we retrace relevant moments of this history in order to project some light on the singular scene of importation implied in the Borgesian appropiation.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0170.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEstudios de Teoría Literaria - Revista digital: artes, letras y humanidadesSame topicBorges, Kipling, and Jewish IdentityFrench-language works237,207