Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the status of women in theatre in the early twenty-first century and determines that while there has been some improvement in Canada in the last twenty-five years,women still lag behind men in terms of employment in key creative positions Studies show that only 30-35% of the nation’s artistic directors are female and that this limits the production of work by female playwrights and the hiring of female directors. Problems are further exacerbated where there is limited provincial and corporate funding, as in Atlantic Canada. Little money, combined with a greater likelihood that work by female playwrights will be defined as risky and less attractive for sponsors and mainstream theatres, further restricts opportunities for women in theatre. Women also identify traditional hierarchical practices in the theatre industry and social policies, which fail to provide parental leave for self-employed workers or adequate publicly-funded daycare, as barriers to their participation.While increased government funding would help all theatre professionals, including women, and women can support one another through networking andmentorship, the theatre communitymust actively identify and change the practices that lead to gender inequity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".