o relato de um “viajante” anónimo na Península Ibérica (século XVIII)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No século das Luzes multiplicaram-se as edições de guias e relatos de viagens, num estilo acessível aos leitores interessados e, preferencialmente, com gravuras. Neste género, surgem as “Délices”, título muito usado em guias descritivos de países ou cidades, feitos por viajantes. Escolhemos, como exemplo, a obra “Les Délices de l’Espagne & du Portugal”, na sua edição de 1715 e numa edição posterior intitulada “Annales de l’Espagne & du Portugal”, de 1741. Obra anónima na escrita, com um autor fictício dos desenhos que deram origem às gravuras, foi editada em francês e neerlandês nas oficinas do famoso Pieter van der Aa, em Leiden. Pretendemos apresentar esta visão de Portugal, ora positiva ora negativa, também em comparação com Espanha, e dar a conhecer os aspetos que, por fim, levaram à sua proibição pelo Tribunal da Inquisição. During the Enlightenment, editions of guides and travel reports multiplied using an accessible style for interested readers and, preferably, with engravings. In this genre, the “Délices" was a title widely used in descriptive guides to countries or cities, made by travellers. We have chosen, as an example, the work "Les Délices de l'Espagne & du Portugal", in its 1715 edition as well as a later edition entitled “Annales de l’Espagne et du Portugal, of 1741. It is an anonymous work with a fictitious author of the drawings that gave way to the engravings, and it was published in French and Dutch in the workshops of the famous Pieter van der Aa, in Leiden. We intend to present this vision of Portugal, sometimes positive and sometimes negative, also in comparison with Spain, and to disclose the aspects that utterly led to the prohibition of the work by the Inquisition Court.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".