New "Look," Emerging Vision: A Time For Introductions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the Executive Editor: I am constantly at least a bit surprised by the path my life takes. Little did I know that slightly over twenty-six years after Ann Saddlemyer and I headed up the founding of this publication, and somewhat less time after I retired from its editing, I would be writing this short introduction in the capacity of Executive Editor of Theatre Research in Canada/Recherches Théâtrales au Canada. When we originally conceived of the journal, we thought of "theatre research" in terms of a very broad understanding of those two words. As scholars interested in theatre in its more than three dimensions, Ann and I were conscious of the theatre's visuality as well as its textuality, and its almost endless modes of performative expression. I remember our first issue tried to signal that with an article on circus, a tribute to Dora Mavor Moore, an essay on a historic theatre, another on nineteenthcentury theatre management, one on a "Canadian" company in the West Indies, and another on contrasting versions of a recent theatrical success. Reality was that we also lacked content in French despite the strong work of Louise Forsyth in our editorial team. But one of our wishes at the time was that we would leave enough room in the journal's mandate and design for it to change and grow, and for high quality research and reporting that were outside the traditional boundaries as well as work that was within. To a significant degree, that has occurred thanks to the efforts of the editorial teams after us. But this newly designed issue with its completely new team of editors seems to me to indicate an exceptional desire and opportunity to go further than before. We live in a climate that in many ways is remarkably open to and desirous of expression that is aptly different from what has preceded it. To say that we live in a different Canada now may be a cliché, but even in a cliché there is truth. Canada is now a country of many evident cultures and many forms of theatre and we need many forms of theatre research to represent it, its history and its place in an international world. There is much to be done and said in this new world, and so many areas to develop that have not been well developed to this point. The plans Bruce Barton briefy outlines in his short introduction, and that are obviously shared by Louise, Patrick, "the other" Bruce, Rebecca and Jennifer, are already becoming evident in the contents and design of this issue. They will be even more evident in the forthcoming issues, two of which are virtually ready for the printer, including one under the skilled guest editorship of Glen Nichols and the same Louise (Ladouceur).
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 | 0.009 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.022 |
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".