MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018945562 · doi:10.1353/wfs.2014.0017

Powerful Narratives in Contemporary Quebec Dramaturgy by Women

2014· article· en· W2018945562 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Louise Forsythe

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen in French studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerformative utteranceNarrativeRepresentation (politics)DramaturgyBiographyLife writingLiteratureCharacter (mathematics)AestheticsArtHistorySociologyVisual artsGender studiesPoliticsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The more or less direct representation of life stories which characterized many feminist plays in Québec in the 1970s and 1980s opened paths toward a richly creative range of dramaturgical and performative strategies making innovative uses of narration and narrators. Women's voices, speaking or writing about girls' and women's real experiences (outside stereotypes and taboos), demanded to be heard on stage starting in the 1970s. While explicit biography and autobiography in Québec women's theater have grown muted, voices telling stories (usually those of individuals previously silenced or rendered invisible through established theater convention), drawing spectators' attention to elements in the story, functioning as narrators, and speaking from one of various layers of spaces between fiction and reality are now heard in a number of plays by women. Since narration has not been a primary device in traditions of theatrical representation, it is interesting to study some of the innovative and effective ways in which women have been dramatizing their corporeal presence and their coming to voice in scenically congenial contexts, along with their ways of seeing and knowing the world through their women's eyes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen in French studiesSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207