MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108655208 · doi:10.1177/0264619609359753

Horatio audio-describes Shakespeare’s <i>Hamlet</i>

2010· article· en· W2108655208 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Visual Impairment · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSubtitles and Audiovisual Media
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHAMLET (protein complex)Presentation (obstetrics)Style (visual arts)Point (geometry)Production (economics)ArtVisual artsComputer scienceMultimediaLiteratureMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Audio description (AD) has been introduced as one solution for providing people who are blind or have low vision with access to live theatre, film and television content. However, there is little research to inform the process, user preferences and presentation style. We present a study of a single live audio-described performance of Hart House Theatre’s production of Hamlet in Toronto, Ontario . Unlike conventional description, the AD was designed in cooperation with the creative team to fit with the production’s style. The AD was written using the language and rhythmic structure (iambic pentameter) that mimicked that of Shakespeare and was delivered from Horatio’s point of view. Audience reactions to the production and AD were generally positive, with people reporting that they were entertained by the play and the AD.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.238 · 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