MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ficcionalización de Simón Bolívar como personaje heroico en su discurso epistolar

2021· article· es· W3198433475 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert Guerrero Pérez

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrehojas Revista de Estudios Hispánicos · 2021
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural and political discourse analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En esta investigación se realiza un estudio sobre la ficcionalización de Simón Bolívar como personaje heroico. El corpus que se toma son sus cartas. Se analiza cómo hay huellas de esta intención en enunciados a lo largo de su escritura epistolar, que dejan entrever que existe a nivel discursivo, implícita y explícitamente, una autoconcepción de él mismo como héroe. El plano teórico se sustenta con base a teorías de la ficción y del personaje. El análisis de las epístolas está subdividido en tres grandes partes: “Formación del héroe” (1805-1812), etapa en la que se observa cómo el personaje va internalizando que es una figura heroica que tiene un papel importante en la historia; “Consolidación del héroe” (1812-1827), fase en la que el personaje histórico tiene la autoconcepción de que es un héroe y analiza aspectos de su entorno con base a estos parámetros (la importancia de la gloria y la trascendencia, una visión clara de los amigos/enemigos similar a como se encuentra en relatos épicos, entre otros); y “Declive del héroe” (1828-1830), fase caracterizada por presentar huellas de desencanto, el cuestionamiento de las traiciones y rememorar errores.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntrehojas Revista de Estudios HispánicosSame topicCultural and political discourse analysisFrench-language works237,207