MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391167238 · doi:10.61411/rsc202422017

Revisão de Textos Acadêmicos de Obras Hollywoodianas

2024· article· pt· W4391167238 on OpenAlexaff
Roberto Minadeo

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Sociedade Científica · 2024
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhysical Education and Sports Studies
Canadian institutionsCégep de l'Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O presente artigo realizou uma revisão de artigos acadêmicos centrados em obras cinematográficas ou em artistas. Também algumas poucas dissertações foram vistas, ao lado de um Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso. Saem do escopo desta pesquisa textos que comparam filmes diversos, fazem paralelismos entre filmes com outras obras de arte ou que fazem digressões de cunho filosófico, social, político ou histórico a partir de obras fílmicas. O objetivo foi compreender com maior profundidade tais obras. Filmes ou artistas que receberam a atenção de mais de uma visão acadêmica são ocasião de análise mais rica no texto.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Sociedade CientíficaSame topicPhysical Education and Sports StudiesFrench-language works237,207