MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026301318 · doi:10.15581/007.29.009

1622 o la canonización de la Reforma Católica

2020· article· es· W3026301318 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnuario de Historia de la Iglesia · 2020
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEarly Modern Women Writers
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de Navarra
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La canonización de 1622, en que se inscribió en el catálogo de los santos a los beatos Isidro Labrador, Ignacio de Loyola, Francisco Javier, Teresa de Jesús y Felipe Neri, fue memorable por diversas razones. Su gestación no fue sencilla. Paulo v había decidido canonizar al beato Isidro labrador, lo que asumió también su sucesor, Gregorio xv. Las fuertes presiones a las que fue sometido tanto por los monarcas católicos como por las órdenes a las que pertenecían los nuevos santos, especialmente los jesuitas, determinaron a corto plazo su canonización conjunta, agregándose primero la beata Teresa, luego Ignacio de Loyola y Francisco Javier y, finalmente, con el fin de evitar una ceremonia exclusivamente española, a instancias de la propia Congregación, el beato Felipe Neri. Sin negar el componente político de la canonización, en el presente artículo se ofrecen otras líneas de interpretación convergentes con el fin de demostrar que la de 1622 fue no sólo la canonización de los protagonistas de la Reforma Católica sino, simbólicamente, de la propia Reforma de la Iglesia en si misma.

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), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.766
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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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