MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3566462 · doi:10.3138/ctr.106.003

Youth Arts Festivals and the Politics of Participation

2001· article· en· W3566462 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mary Ann Hunter

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsPresentation (obstetrics)Government (linguistics)Performing artsPoliticsVisual artsPopulationCensusMedia studiesPublic relationsSociologyAdvertisingPolitical scienceArtBusinessMedicineDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artrage, Next Wave, Take Over, Come Out, Loud and Fried are just some of the myriad youth arts festivals held in Australia in recent years. Usually supported by government arts funding and curated by professional producers, these festivals attract young artists, young audiences and lots of attention from those interested in new or emerging performance practices. Festival participation is increasingly popular among Australians, with over 30 per cent of eighteen-to-twenty-four-year-olds having attended a festival in the year prior to the last population census (Bureau of Statistics). Each state hosts at least one major recurrent youth arts festival, and many are vehicles for the development and presentation of new Australian theatre. Multimedia, interactive art and cross-art form performance often gain top billing in programming that privileges the innovative, highlights the social and sometimes inadvertently prescribes “the young.”

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicTheatre and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207