MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280622122 · doi:10.14482/zp.15.294.56

Analyse d’un dialogue extrait du film «Tesis» d’Alejandro Amenábar

2022· article· es· W4280622122 on OpenAlex
Jimmy Spencer Roa Bernal

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueZona Próxima · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Linguistic Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uno de los aspectos más importantes como seres humanos, es el encuentro social. Estas interacciones cara a cara permiten a los interlocutores enriquecer y actualizar sus estrategias conversacionales con el fin de alcanzar sus objetivos. Así, convencer y persuadir forman parte de nuestros intercambios cotidianos. Ahora bien, ¿qué tipos de roles praxiológicos asumimos en el momento de formular y hacer nuestras peticiones? ¿Cuáles son aquellas estrategias empleadas para dicho propósito? ¿Qué elementos gramaticales recorre nuestro discurso? A través de este artículo, trataremos de responder a estos interrogantes. Para nuestra tarea, tomaremos un fragmento de un diálogo de una película y lo analizaremos empleando la teoría modular del discurso.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0810.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.218 · 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