MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3031083662 · doi:10.1017/9781108348447.010

Theatre Festivals in Post-Arab Spring Countries

2020· book-chapter· en· W3031083662 on OpenAlexaff
Khalid Amine

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissentCompromiseMedia studiesContext (archaeology)PraxisPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)ArtSociologyVisual artsAestheticsHumanitiesHistoryLawPoliticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arab region has boasted an enormous range of theatre festivals throughout the last three decades. The most important ones, Carthage Theatre Days and Cairo International Festival for Contemporary and Experimental Theatre, are organized under the auspices of government institutions such as ministries of culture. These temporary events are often caught within an ambiguous compromise; that is, the paradox of sanctioning dominant power structures through heightening the continuum of normal time while subverting hierarchies by interrupting the flow of life. The focus of the present undertaking, however, is more a revisiting of the most visible festivals after the Arab Spring, and the current theatrical co-motion. Concepts such as ‘theatrical co-motion’ (Al-Hirak Al-Masrahiy) have gained new momentum among young performers within the context of the recent popular protests (Al-Hirak Chaibi). Despite the fact that most of these organized events are instrumentalized to control dissent, they are also scenes whereupon revolutionary praxis and detour are mapped.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts→French-language works237,207→