MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3212227584

A IMAGEM LITERÁRIA REPRESENTÁVEL E TOLERÁVEL NO DISCURSO DA VISIBILIDADE POLÍTICA DE ANTENOR LAVAL EM DOIS IRMÃOS

2019· article· pt· W3212227584 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cristiane de Mesquita Alves, Leandro Rodrigues Lage, José Mariano Klautau de Araújo Filho, Jorge Eiró

Bibliographic record

Venuee-scrita · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural, Media, and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As imagens formam uma nova escrita que modifica os métodos de representação. Elas surgem como uma nova relação entre imagem e linguagem, capaz de modificar o legível e engendrar o visível. (QUÉAU, 1997). Diante disso, articula-se o objetivo deste trabalho: compreender o novo processo de representação nos discursos de Antenor Laval de Dois Irmãos (2000) de Milton Hatoum, no que se refere a seus pontos de vista sobre a Ditadura Militar no Brasil, tanto na representação da linguagem literária no romance, quanto na sua representação da imagem fílmica, adaptada para a minissérie global (2017), roteirizada por Maria Camargo. Para a realização dessa análise, partiu-se do método de Literatura Comparada (PICHOIS & ROUSSEAU, 2011), correlacionando tal prática aos aportes teóricos de Literatura e Sociedade (CANDIDO, 2014), imagem e representação nos textos de Rancière (2012), discurso da (in) visibilidade política em Laval a partir de Didi- Huberman (2012), bem como outros autores para sustentar a proposta de que Laval é a personagem que apresenta sua visibilidade política na realidade ficcional do romance, assim como ganha novos métodos e representações, no labirinto das possibilidades interpretativas (LEÃO, 2002) por meio das imagens fílmicas que corroboram para comprovar a ideia levantada no título dessa pesquisa.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 venuee-scrita→Same topicCultural, Media, and Literary Studies→French-language works237,207→