MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W93898095

El afecto y la poshegemonía

2008· article· es· W93898095 on OpenAlex

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

VenueEstudios. Revista de investigaciones literarias y culturales · 2008
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, violence, and history
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Desde un enfoque teorico influenciado por la obra de Gilles Deleuze, este articulo interroga el papel del afecto en la cultura politica contemporanea. Mediante un analisis de la dimension afectiva del terror, subraya las limitaciones de los procesos de “captura afectiva” que la teoria de la hegemonia considera fundamentales para el establecimiento del poder estatal. Pero en el mismo momento en que presenta el terror como un modo de organizacion que subvierte y cuestiona la logica trascendental de la hegemonia, tambien sugiere, contra Deleuze, que el afecto no puede servir de guia hacia una politica poshegemonica, ya que el mismo Estado tiende a volverse inmanente. La porosidad de la division entre trascendencia e inmanencia, entre razon y afecto, hace posible la constitucion doble del Estado, tanto en las instituciones como en el afecto. El articulo termina argumentando que es esta doble constitucion del Estado lo que la teoria de la poshegemonia tiene que analizar

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.260 · 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