MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088030942 · doi:10.26843/rpv112018p201-208

Prazer e Religião em Nelson Rodrigues

2019· article· pt· W3088030942 on OpenAlexaff
Élton de Oliveira Nunes

Bibliographic record

VenueREVISTA PLURI · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArts and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsAdidas (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPleasureArtTheme (computing)CreativityHumanitiesPsychoanalysisSociologyPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este ensaio apresenta uma análise da obra de Nelson Rodrigues sob o enfoque de um tema: Prazer e Religião. Nelson Rodrigues é considerado um dos ícones do teatro brasileiro e fundador do expressionismo como linguagem teatral no Brasil. Entender Nelson Rodrigues e sua obra passa pelo entendimento dos fatores constitutivos de sua vida, formação religiosa, opção pelo expressionismo, seus dramas pessoais e sua criatividade literária. O prazer em Nelson Rodrigues torna-se uma religião na medida em que celebra a vida, e a religião é a própria vida na medida de seus temas recorrentes.Palavras-chave: Prazer, Religião, Nelson Rodrigues, Expressionismo, Vida e Morte.AbstractThis essay presents an analysis of Nelson Rodrigues work under the focus of a theme: Pleasure and Religion. Nelson Rodrigues is considered one of Brazilian theater icons and the founder of expressionism as a theatrical language in Brazil. Understanding Nelson Rodrigues and his work involves the understanding of the constitutive factors of his life, religious formation, expressionism choice, his personal dramas and literary creativity. Nelson Rodrigues's pleasure becomes a religion insofar as it celebrates life, and religion is life itself to the extent of its recurring themes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.220 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 venueREVISTA PLURISame topicArts and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207