MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399796951 · doi:10.15366/ria2024.m2.011

La razón sensible

2024· article· es· W4399796951 on OpenAlex
Amanda Panambí Morales Vidales

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

VenueRevista Iberoamericana de Argumentación · 2024
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues and Policies in Latin America
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotions are complex systems that combine thoughts, culture, feelings, and contexts and do not follow traditional logical patterns, making their comprehension challenging. Some theories, such as those of Solomon (2003) and Ben Ze'ev (2004), suggest that emotions can approach rationality at certain moments. However, emotions cannot be explained rationally in some situations, as not all are cognitions. Emotions possess a different, sensible logic that does not align with traditional rationality. This work argues that emotions are reasonable, alogical, complex, and sensible, forming a coherent yet non-rational reasoning system. Emotions can be understood from an aesthetic perspective, a framework of sensible knowledge. I propose observing the sensible from this framework of understanding, where they can be evaluated and comprehended in argumentation as forms of the sensible.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.359
Teacher spread0.347 · 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