MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1814300973 · doi:10.21083/csieci.v7i1.1489

“A Thread that Connects the Worlds”: Ovoid Logics and the Contradictory Lines of Force of Brazilian Improvisations

2011· article· en· W1814300973 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jason Stanyek

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Studies in Improvisation / Études critiques en improvisation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicBrazilian cultural history and politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImprovisationSociologyPoliticsSubalternLexiconAestheticsCitizenshipCarnivalesqueMedia studiesLinguisticsVisual artsArtPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From sports to politics, from architecture to economics, from the arts to pedagogy, the social and cultural spheres of Brazil have often been characterized as having decidedly improvisative valences. The importance of improvisation to the enactment of brasilidade (Brazilianness) would seem to be borne out by the sheer abundance of common words and phrases used in everyday Brazilian speech that highlight extemporaneous action: jeitinho, malandragem, ginga, jogo de cintura, malícia, gambiarra, esperteza, axé, manha, suingue, astúcia, drible, malabarismo, balanço, equilibrista, pirataria, arranjar-se, molejo, cordialidade, and so on. This essay points to a few “complex tendencies” and “contradictory lines of force,” that emerge out of this lexicon, providing snapshots of three key loci within and around which one can examine and critique the stories people—Brazilians and non-Brazilians alike—tell about what is often taken to be the zygotic relationship between improvisation and brasilidade (Brazilianness). Each of these snapshots—of the jeitinho brasileiro, of the gambiarra aesthetics of the global favela, of futebol brasileiro (Brazilian soccer)—reveal, I hope, that the concept of improvisation (rendered directly and in its many other lexical guises) performs a vital function in Brazil. It’s a nexus around which deliberations over matters of national import take place, a ready-to-hand theoretical apparatus for peering into the “inert vectoring” that characterizes the varied performances of citizenship that take place within Brazilian communities. I’m careful, however, to let the discussions contained in this essay play out within a global frame, working under the assumption that Brazil is not (and never has been) coterminous with itself, and showing that Brazil is constantly being reborn—infranationally, nationally, and globally—under the contradictory forces of appraisals of the improvisative.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.057
Scholarly communication0.0130.009
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Studies in Improvisation / Études critiques en improvisationSame topicBrazilian cultural history and politicsFrench-language works237,207