MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979733791 · doi:10.3138/ctr.180.012

How Do You Stage a Problem like Kevin Spacey? Reflections on Performance and Consent, with Help from Ellie Moon and Adam Lazarus

2019· article· en· W2979733791 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kim Solga

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHannah Arendt's Political Philosophy
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrder (exchange)AestheticsSociologyDaughterAdam smithPsychoanalysisLawPsychologyArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How can theatre and performance open avenues for a nuanced exploration of consent in the wake of #MeToo? What aesthetic, generic, and dramaturgical choices may best contribute to this kind of exploration? As audience members, do we need to be made properly uncomfortable in our seats in order to think deeply about consent at the theatre? What are the ethical boundaries of such discomfort? Kim Solga investigates these questions and more as she revisits her experiences seeing Ellie Moon’s Asking for It and Adam Lazarus’s Daughter shortly after the Weinstein allegations broke in late 2017.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0240.053
Scholarly communication0.0140.012
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0070.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicHannah Arendt's Political PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207