MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312944895 · doi:10.15581/017.8.28068

Sobre prisiones y sonetos: Francisco de Quevedo y Tommaso Campanella. El mundo de los libros y el libro del mundo

2018· article· es· W4312944895 on OpenAlex

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

VenueLa Perinola · 2018
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEarly Modern Spanish Literature
Canadian institutionsCamosun College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Es bastante probable que Francisco de Quevedo visitara a Tommaso Campanella en la cárcel de San Elmo en Nápoles donde fue encarcelado entre 1614 y 1618. Este ensayo tiene como principal enfoque sonetos de sendos poetas: «Il mondo è il libro» de Campanella, y «Retirado en la paz de estos desiertos» de Quevedo. En la primera parte del ensayo se examina lo apropiado de la estructura del soneto para una poética que tiene que ver con prisiones y celdas: la forma cerrada del soneto y su calidad «memorable». El concepto del soneto como espacio habitado está desarrollado para abarcar la idea central de los dos poemas: el topos del mundo como libro. Mediante un análisis detallado y con referencia a otros escritores (Drummond, Owen, Gracián) se identifica una serie de variantes del topos en términos de fórmulas que convendrían a teoricistas renacentistas: analogía (mundo=libro); versión negativa o analogía desigual (mundomundo) —como en el soneto quevedesco. Finalmente se examina el significado de esta última fórmula en el contexto de teorías de la historia de la lectura.

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)0.000
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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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