Improvisational Practices in the Production of the Precarious Common Spaces on the Periphery of Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses improvisational cultural practices in relation to sedimented processes and other modes of production. During the economic crisis on Europe’s south edge, extreme neoliberal policies experimented with new modes of social engineering. Yet, even in the face of such coercive systems, emergent cultural practices were improvising, testing their own radical alternatives, and producing nomadic, ephemeral, and impromptu practices inside and outside of social orders. Focusing on a seemingly grey period in the history of a theatre occupation in Athens during the years of the economic crisis, this article examines a series of improvisational practices that emerged in a constant fragile negotiation between agents, structures, social orders, and impossibilities. Through this specific reading of an emergent cultural operation, this article seeks to explore how practices of improvisation can help us rethink and actively produce alternative structures and forms of organization, and further, how practices of improvisation can function as a form of social production in relation to other productions of the same moment. The discussion of these precarious improvisational structures may uncover a modus operandi for rethinking the cultural constellation as a continuously ever-changing system. Improvisational tactics emerge as moments of self-institution that produce ephemerally alternative social imaginaries that might allow us to rethink improvisation’s potential in the current landscape.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".