MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210503630 · doi:10.3138/ctr.189.005

Loss, Great Grief, and Preservation: Brandy Leary’s <i>Suspended</i>

2022· article· en· W4210503630 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Brian Batchelor

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGriefArcticGeographyHistoryOceanographyPsychologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2017, Toronto-based physical theatre artist Brandy Leary performed choreographic research as part of the Arctic Circle’s Summer Solstice Expedition, a multidisciplinary voyage of invited scientists and artists who developed work during their travels in and around the Svalbard archipelago, located in the Arctic Ocean. I focus on one such performance, entitled Suspended, in which Leary hangs precariously off the side of a boat and above a (melting) ice floe. Leary’s explorations were influenced by the Norwegian eco-scientist Per Espen Stoknes’s concept of “Great Grief,” a public grief based on ecological loss due to climate change, as well as the loss of her husband before she embarked on the residency. I read Suspended as a performance that sutures public and private processes of grief. Because Svalbard is home to the Global Seed Vault, a repository of seeds intended to preserve the world’s plant biodiversity, Suspended also connects forms of self-preservation in the face of ecological loss with larger cooperative efforts toward ecological preservation via the saving of seeds. Both Suspended and the vault as endeavours compel us to collectively care about and act toward futures where our relationships—to ice, to the environment, and to each other—are radically changed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicGeographies of human-animal interactionsFrench-language works237,207