Arquitectas españolas en premios nacionales a partir de la segunda mitad del siglo xx. Un estudio sobre distinciones en arquitectura, planeamiento urbano, paisajismo y diseño industrial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo de investigación estudia la presencia de mujeres en galardones profesionales li- gados a la arquitectura en España. A travésde un detallado análisis de trece premios de arquitectura de carácter nacional, se verifica la tradición patriarcal de la mayoría de estos reconocimientos. Se documentan hitos históricos de arquitectas sobresalientes, y se identifica un mayor número de ga- lardones en ámbitos laborales ligados a los gustos tradicionalmente considerados como femeninos —el paisajismo, la restauración de patrimonio o el diseño deproducto—. Asimismo, se comprueba la escasez de proyectos realizados únicamente por mujeres y el mayor reconocimiento social a ar- quitectas que trabajan con varones en pareja o equipo. El artículo plantea una discusión final como crítica feminista al modo en el que estos galardones valoran la arquitectura.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".