MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060698688 · doi:10.3138/ctr.143.29

Searching for Poetry: On Collective Collaboration in Wajdi Mouawad's Theatre

2010· article· en· W2060698688 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yana Meerzon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryLyricismEmbodied cognitionPower (physics)ArtCollective intelligenceVisual artsAestheticsTheatre directorProcess (computing)LiteratureSociologyComputer sciencePhilosophyEpistemologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improvised dialogue, Wajdi Mouawad claims, does not constitute a production-forming part in his creative process. It is collective collaboration that informs his experience as a playwright and as a director. For each show he produces, Mouawad creates a new collective that he leads in dreaming up the situations and characters of a future play. Thus, unlike in the practice of collective creation, when a company is subjected to complex power-related issues, the collaboration in Mouawad's theatre is used as playwright's laboratory and excludes the uncertainty of authorship. The theatre of poetry sees dramatic text as the ultimate outcome of a collective effort. Here everything and everybody is called to serve the lyricism, the rhythms and the sound design of the text to be embodied on the stage and graphically laid out on the page.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0100.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations41
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207