<i>Start where you are</i>: Graphic ordering influences improvisational dance
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is an analysis and reflection on the role of lists and diagrams in Start where you are, a multimedia improvisational piece performed as part of square zero independent dance festival: the second edition/la deuxième édition. This interdisciplinary festival was organised by collective (gulp) dance projects and took place in Ottawa, Canada, in August 2005. Start where you are was the result of a collaboration between the authors: two dance artists (Andrew and MacKinnon, the principals of (gulp)) and a visual communication designer (Gillieson). A sound artist and a lighting technician also participated in the work. This is a post-performance retrospective meant to analyze more closely the experience that meshed the evidentiary weight of words and graphics with the ephemerality and subjectivity of movement-based live performance. It contextualizes some of the work of collective (gulp) within a larger tradition of improvisation in modern dance. It also looks at how choice-making processes are central to improvisation, how they relate to Start, and how linguistic material can intersect with and support improvisational performance. Lastly, it examines some characteristics of lists and diagrams, unique forms of visual language that are potentially rich sources of material for improvisation.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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 it