La canonización de Ignacio de Loyola (1622): lucha de intereses entre Roma, Madrid y París
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La canonización de Ignacio de Loyola simbolizó el triunfo de un nuevo modelo de espiritualidad; el mismo que reflejaban Felipe Neri, Teresa de Jesús y Francisco Javier, canonizados todos\n\t\t\t\t en bloque —junto a Isidro Labrador— en 1622. Tal acción “canonizadora” no tuvo precedentes.\n\t\t\t\t Pero además de un modelo espiritual, en concreto la canonización del fundador de la Compañía\n\t\t\t\t de Jesús, significó la glorificación de un nuevo proyecto político que se analizará en las siguientes\n\t\t\t\t páginas: el apoyo de Roma a una Monarquía francesa, recién convertida al catolicismo, mostrándola\n\t\t\t\t como única protectora de la Compañía de Jesús, de la que Ignacio era su fundador. De esta forma,\n\t\t\t\t la imagen de santidad proyectada desde el Papado fue la de un San Ignacio alejado de todo vínculo\n\t\t\t\t de origen con la Monarquía hispana.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".