Bibliographic record
Abstract
O progresso tecnocientífico tem, aos poucos, tornado mais complexos os vínculos entre o ser humano e outras formas de vida, instaurando, entre o indivíduo e suas representações em um mundo paralelo como o virtual, novos modos de exploração da realidade. Diante dos desafios impostos pelas transformações tecnológicas, este volume busca explorar as contribuições mútuas entre a ciência e a ficção, com foco especial na literatura. Os textos apresentados completam a trilogia da coleção Imaginários Tecnocientíficos, dedicada a investigar as imagens que ciência e técnica atribuem a seus objetos de estudo, refletindo sobre as características que as aproximam — ou diferenciam — do imaginário de outros campos, como a literatura e as artes. Com textos de pesquisadores do Brasil e do Canadá, oriundos de estudos relacionados a literatura, educação, artes, design e comunicação, esta obra estrutura-se em quinze capítulos distribuídos em três seções: Horizontes Imaginados, explora a complexa relação entre ciência e ficção, examinando como os dois campos se influenciam mutuamente; Horizontes Paralelos, com foco na representação na ficção científica; e Horizontes Disruptivos, que reflete sobre os impactos culturais e sociais das tecnologias atuais.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.005 |
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".