Bibliographic record
Abstract
En este artículo hemos intentado poner de relieve la íntima solidaridad que existe entre la ontología y la estética de Gilles Deleuze. La conexión entre ambas disciplinas es tan estrecha que resulta materialmente imposible aproximarse a la teoría del arte de Deleuze sin tener una clara comprensión de las nociones nucleares que integran su pensamiento. Los conceptos de Deleuze no son estáticos, sino móviles, lo que les permite variar de fisonomía a medida que se desplaza el horizonte de la investigación. Este es el motivo de que, en el proyecto del filósofo francés, la obra de arte reciba un tratamiento conceptual que es tributario de tesis elaboradas en el ámbito de la más rigurosa especulación ontológica. Deleuze concibe el arte como un antídoto contra las pasiones tristes de las que hablaba Spinoza, un revulsivo contra una Sociedad que asfixia la creatividad con sus clichés, un «paisaje» nuevo que solo podemos habitar a condición de despojarnos de nuestra pretendida identidad.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".