MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391976410 · doi:10.7202/1109184ar

Book Worlds as a Window to Analyze the Extreme Right Wing in Argentina

2024· article· en· W4391976410 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ezequiel Saferstein, Analía Goldentul

Bibliographic record

VenueMémoires du livre · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWindow (computing)Extreme rightRight wingWingGeographyComputer sciencePolitical scienceLawEngineeringAerospace engineeringWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines how certain contemporary books and authors contributed to the formation of an extreme right political option in Argentina. The paper focuses on Nicolás Márquez and Agustín Laje, two authors who have achieved unprecedented visibility, which is reflected in the circulation and sales of their books, in the number of their followers on social networks, and in the magnitude of their events and conferences. In 2016, the publication of El libro negro de la nueva izquierda. Ideología de género o subversión cultural [ The Black Book of the New Left: Gender Ideology or Cultural Subversion ] established both authors as figures with “authority” in right-wing culture, and enabled the formation of communities of young readers from the promotional circuit of the work. Having attended different events and conducted a series of in‑depth interviews with young readers, we explore the forms of sociability and political subjectivation enabled by these authors and this book in the space of circulation of right-wing ideas in Argentina today.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMémoires du livreSame topicLatin American Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207