Bibliographic record
Abstract
La noción de silencio es utilizada por diversas tradiciones filosóficas y religiosas (gnósticos, Proclo, Dionisio Aeropagita…) en un contexto de teología apofática: el silencio es una forma de hablar del Principio que trasciende de manera absoluta cualquier calificativo o atributo. Ante esta situación de vaciamiento y anulación de todo discurso metafísico, la figura del ángel se nos presenta como el nombramiento de lo que no tiene nombre. Se hace también una cala en el zoroastrimo como afirmación de la sustantividad de los nombres divinos. Abstract: The concept of “silence” occurs in different philosophical and religious traditionssuch as the gnostics, Proclus, Dionysus the Aeropagite, etc., within a context of apophatictheology, the silence is the way to talk about the Principle that transcends, in an absolute way,any adjective or attribute. The subsequent “emptying” or “abolishing” any metaphysicaldiscourse, can be solved through the angel as the “naming” of the Unnamed. This articlewill also deal on the relation of zoroastrianism with the Divine Names.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".