MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123356284 · doi:10.36517/argumentos..25.61496

A evolução cética da filosofia na ficção de Machado de Assis ao longo de quatro encontros na Rua do Ouvidor

2020· article· pt· W3123356284 on OpenAlexaff
José R. Maia Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueArgumentos - Revista de Filosofia · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature, Culture, and Criticism
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanceHumanitiesPhilosophyPhysicsArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four meetings of the narrator/protagonist on Ouvidor street (Rio de Janeiro city) in four Machado de Assis’ stories are examined diachronically in order to show the evolution of a skeptical perspective in his fiction. Each meeting indicates a step in the construction of this perspective. The first meeting occurs in the short story Happiness through marriage, one of Machado’s earliest ones. It exhibits the antecedent conditions to the development of the skeptical perspective along the second phase of Machado’s literary production, namely, a dogmatic view opposing false appearance to true reality. The second meeting is extracted from The Posthumous Memoirs of Brás Cubas, the novel that marks the beginning of Machado’s second and skeptical phase. The meeting shows the false appearances penetrating and corrupting true reality, characterizing a Pascalian perspective. In the third meeting, from Dom Casmurro, appearance obscures reality, characterizing a classic skeptical perspective. Finally, in the fourth meeting, pointed out in Machado’s last novel, Counselor Ayres’s Memorial, appearance is the object of perception, which no longer attempts to reach a hidden reality, characterizing an original Machadian aesthetic kind of skepticism. The article begins with general remarks about the relevance of Ouvidor street in Machado de Assis’ work.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

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 studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArgumentos - Revista de FilosofiaSame topicLiterature, Culture, and CriticismFrench-language works237,207