MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Regional Novel and the Novel of the Mexican Revolution on Common Ground

2022· book-chapter· en· W4283578187 on OpenAlexaff
Tamara L. Mitchell, Amanda M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpansiveLatin AmericansCommon groundSovereigntyNarrativePoliticsGeographyCartographyPolitical scienceHistoryGenealogySociologyLiteratureArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter focuses on the common ground tread by the Latin American regional novel and the novel of the Mexican Revolution, namely, a shared preoccupation with questions of land sovereignty and land ownership. While the two narrative modes are often considered separate literary phenomena, this chapter argues for evaluating them together as critical responses to the reorganization of Latin American economies, politics, and cultures by neocolonial interests. Focusing on an emblematic novel from each category—José Eustasio Rivera’s La vorágine (The Vortex, 1924) and Martín Luis Guzmán’s El águila y la serpiente (The Eagle and the Serpent, 1928), this analysis charts a more expansive geography of the presence of tierra in the Latin American novel and proposes an alternative shared legacy of such works.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.206 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicLatin American Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207