8 Days / Project bk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ongoing 8 DAYS project addresses a need for peer-to-peer choreographic development in Canada, insisting that this mode is crucial to the continued relevance of the art form. Instigated in 2012 by Ame Henderson and Tedd Robinson, the subsequent encounters stem from the 8 DAYS and 8 DAYS II participants’ desire to continue this artistic exchange. How dance artists work is intimately related to what they create. Theory and practice, talking and making, doing and reflecting, and the systems we do and don’t rely on are understood as interwoven threads of creative development. 8 DAYS is an opportunity to collide practices to provoke, invigorate and inspire each other. 8 DAYS escapes the pressures of production-driven work to create space to reflect on one’s current practice and to envision – through dialogue and experimentation – new artistic possibilities (...) 8 DAYS was held at la B.A.R.N. on Lac Leslie in the Pontiac Region of Quebec, from June 16 – 24, 2012. It was hosted and supported by 10 Gates Dancing Inc. and Public Recordings -- Public Recordings' web site.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.453 | 0.212 |
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".