Bibliographic record
Abstract
El uso coloquial acostumbra nombrar a una persona que ingiere alcohol en forma excesiva -de acuerdo a ciertos criterios científicos y sociales-como un alcohólico, en cambio, resulta un tanto descabellado (y un tanto desafinado) calificar a una persona que trabaja en forma excesiva : "trabajólico".En el primer caso (tomado sólo a modo de ejemplo), a la raíz de la palabra, alcohol, se agrega el sufijo -ico (de la terminación latina icus, cuyo significado denota la referencia a la raíz) formando un adjetivo derivado, alcohólico ; luego este adjetivo puede sustantivarse a través del llamado un enfático ; en este caso un alcohólico.La palabra trabajo, sin embargo, no presenta en castellano posibilidades similares de adjetivación.Por lo tanto, se retiene como válida la expresión inglesa workaholic dentro de este glosario en el sitio de la letra W, según sugiere la RAE, respecto de la utilización de voces de procedencia extranjera.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.092 | 0.021 |
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".