MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388272305 · doi:10.1201/9781003260554-50

Time after time; how did Pessoa-Soares and Hesse-Haller architect time-dimension aesthetically to form modern readers and liminal authors?

2023· book-chapter· en· W4388272305 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fernando Jorge de Oliveira Ribeiro

Bibliographic record

VenueTime and space · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsLiminalityDimension (graph theory)Fourth DimensionArtArt historyAestheticsSpacetimeMathematicsPure mathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the help of Fernando Pessoa’s (featured by his heteronym Bernardo Soares) this article reader is summoned to understand the value of artistic sensations and emotions within an aesthetical speech wherein imagination, according to J. Luis Borges, play a distinctive role while configuring a modern literary artwork in order to resist every typical adversity of Man’s existence under every contingency. In Der Steppenwolf H. Hesse’s one sees how such artistic sensations and feelings are delivered to awaken every modern reader’s sensitivity and to build deeply a narratee’s conscience to prove how valuable the aesthetical emotionality is thus proving that without emotions and no literary word would be configured as well as without a consequent slow time-dimension any human being would not be resilient enough to fight against the frenetic rhythm of our civilization which should be counterbalanced by literary art. Moreover, life within such a literary artwork is to be the true example not only of a temporality consciousness but also of the true typical silence of modernity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.174 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime and spaceSame topicArchitecture and Computational DesignFrench-language works237,207