Hellenistic Poetry in Translation by Brazilian Women: A Yet Untrodden Path
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Embora os estudos de poesia helenística tenham crescido no país desde o começo do século, seguindo tendências globais de crescimento e interesse em determinados temas de pesquisa, ainda são poucas as traduções publicadas em livro e a grande maioria delas é feita por pesquisadores homens. Pesquisa bibliográfica usando bases de dados de dissertações e teses mostra que há mais traduções de pesquisadoras mulheres no âmbito da produção acadêmica e elas tendem a integrar seus trabalhos de mestrado e doutorado. Entretanto, esses trabalhos raramente se tornam livros publicados, permanecendo inertes nos repositórios de acesso livre de universidades. Dessa maneira, os objetivos deste artigo são descrever e analisar a disparidade de gênero encontrada nas traduções de poesia helenística publicadas em formato de livro e propor ações para diminuir a assimetria de gênero na tradução de textos clássicos.
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 | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".