Moving center stage: Dance and Modernization in Late Twentieth Century Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Writing about the thousands of amateur and semiprofessional dancers who were soon to descend on a local dance competition on April 26, 2016, the homegrown newspaper of the off-island Montreal bedroom community of Terrebonne, Journal La Revue de Terrebonne noted that the Montreal region of some four millions souls was home to as many dance schools — 96 — as Italy.1 That weekend, 10,000 dancers would arrive at an otherwise unremarkable suburb of about 100,000 nestled on the St. Lawrence River’s north shore, thereby confirming once more that Montreal had become one of the world’s hot spots for dance.Homegrown dancers and choreographers were not just local, of course. At the same time as the Terrebonne dance invasion, Montreal companies were appearing on stages around the world, often to rave reviews. Performance dance has entered the soul of Quebec where, just over a half-century ago, the art form had been all but banned by the moral strictures of clerical traditionalists. The city’s and province’s explosion in all manner of dance — and other arts — tracked remarkable political, social, cultural, and spiritual transformations that swept across Quebec society throughout the mid-twentieth century. The story of dance offers one insightful piece of the larger tale of a sudden embrace of modernity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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".