Ulises en la redacción. Indicios, periodismo y cultura de masas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo propone analizar el periodismo como una forma de conocimiento ligada al desciframiento de indicios y al establecimiento de hipótesis que guien la investigación a través del proceso inferencial. Se recupera la idea de que existe una inteligencia p´ráctica basada en la inferencia y la anticipación que los griegos llamaron metis y que marcó tanto los inicios de la medicina como de la retórica. También se establecen las conexiones entre estas formas antiguas de descriframiento de los signos y los conceptos de índice y de abducción en la semiótica de Peirce, analizando el lugar que el hábito, la duda y la creencia tienen a la hora de orientar las inferencias. Finalmente, se ponen en acción estos conceptos mediante el análisis de las investigaciones periodísticas sobre los abusos sexuales del clero católico en Boston, relatadas en la película Spotlight, de Tom McCarthy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".