MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965672112 · doi:10.1177/1077800411415498

Delineating a Spectrum of Research-Based Theatre

2011· article· en· W1965672112 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

VenueQualitative Inquiry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField (mathematics)SociologyTheatre studiesEpistemologyComputer scienceVisual artsDramaArtMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article builds on existing definitions and classification systems of research-based theatre to offer a way to define subgenres within the field. In order to identify similarities and particularities of theatrical performances based on research, the authors first consider definitions from practitioners working within the academy and those creating theatre for the general public. After reviewing these existing traditions and definitions, the authors delineate a spectrum of research-based theatre. This spectrum is based on two defining continua: the research continuum, which distinguishes among many types of research used to inform research-based theatre, and the performance continuum, which distinguishes among different kinds of performances, audiences, and purposes of a given research-based theatre piece. The spectrum of research-based theatre formed by combining these continua may assist practitioners in determining and honoring the goals and outcomes of their own work, while not making unnecessary comparisons with those working toward different goals and outcomes.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.473
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.023 · 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