MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211261582 · doi:10.1344/452f.2022.26.3

Lengua, exilio e identidad en dos escritoras francófonas: Kim Thúy y Laura Alcoba

2022· article· es· W4211261582 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ángeles Sánchez Hernández

Bibliographic record

Venue452ºF Revista de Teoría de la literatura y Literatura Comparada · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPersona

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El artículo presenta la obra de dos escritoras de lengua francesa, Kim Thúy y Laura Alcoba, que han sufrido el exilio y que habitan en dos países de asilo distintos: Québec y Francia. Las dos despliegan una narración que articula la ficción y la realidad de forma innovadora para dejar constancia de una experiencia del exilio compartida con otras personas; en buena parte, la toma de la palabra pública con sus novelas trata de dar voz a estas vivencias silenciadas. La problemática de la identidad adquiere una dimensión esencial en cuya construcción el elemento familiar se instaura como fundamento esencial. El ensamblaje de la identidad de ambas escritoras se construye entre el presente y el pasado revisitado desde la edad adulta. En sus novelas, las narradoras de sus historias reivindican la construcción identitaria híbrida o transcultural, este rasgo caracteriza su personalidad literaria. La singularidad que une a Alcoba y Thúy yace en la elección de una lengua otra que la materna que las dos conocen sobradamente; sin embargo, el francés es elegido para dar testimonio de su recorrido vital. Este estudio trata de constatar el porqué de esa elección que les ha dado la libertad íntima de expresión para contar su exilio y su integración.

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)0.002
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 score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue452ºF Revista de Teoría de la literatura y Literatura ComparadaSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207