MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760459599 · doi:10.1177/1470357217727678

Who’s devising your theatre experience? A director’s approach to inclusive theatre for blind and low vision theatregoers

2017· article· en· W2760459599 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

VenueVisual Communication · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSubtitles and Audiovisual Media
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmateurFilm directorEntertainmentArtTheatre directorProgram directorTransformative learningSociologyPerspective (graphical)Visual artsAestheticsManagementPolitical scienceMovie theaterMedicinePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the authors present the first documented implementation of a director-produced and delivered audio description (AD) for devising theatre. In a single live, audio-described performance of Highway 63: The Fort Mac Show at Theatre Passe Muraille in Toronto, Canada, the director/describer’s artistically informed approach focuses on entertainment value for blind and low vision (B/LV) theatregoers. In-depth, semi-structured interviews with the director/screenwriter/describer garnered insight into a director’s unique perspective on the development process for the integrated approach to AD, including her artistic choices, expectations and delivery style as a first-time amateur director/describer. The process of developing and delivering integrated AD had a transformative effect on her as a director.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.297 · 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