MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

La Aldea Global. La globalización, repensar McLuhan en el siglo XXI

2022· article· es· W4224600449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniela Musicco Nombela

Bibliographic record

VenueComunicación y Hombre · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLiteracy and Educational Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fue Marshall McLuhan el primer teórico que en 1964 habló de la idea de Aldea Global en su ensayo “Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man”. Nacido en Canadá en 1911, estudió literatura inglesa en la Universidad de Manitoba y después en la de Cambridge. Fue profesor en la universidad de Wisconsin y en la Universidad de Saint Luis; se convirtió al catolicismo. Por sus intereses y estudios, pronto fue reconocido como una autoridad en el campo de los medios de comunicación y las tecnologías. Enseñó en el Assumption College, en el St Michael’ s College (46-79), University of Toronto, y en Fordham University, donde ocurrió el Famoso experimento de Fordham sobre los efectos de la televisión. Murió en Toronto en 1980. La idea de aldea global nace en McLuhan tras la observación de como los medios de comunicación, habían sido capaces de superar cualquier distancia física, acercando a los habitantes de la tierra, haciéndolos próximos, vecinos, convirtiendo la tierra en una gran aldea global. En esta nueva aldea global los aldeanos pueden conocer que hacen, como viven, que dicen los demás aldeanos; un aldeano en N.Y

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0110.011
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComunicación y HombreSame topicLiteracy and Educational PracticesFrench-language works237,207