MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229081561 · doi:10.3138/jcs-2021-0010

Acts of Faith: The Postmigrant Theatre of David Yee

2022· article· en· W4229081561 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ric Knowles

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGerman legal, social, and political studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFaithSociologyTurkishDramaEthnic groupImmigrationBuddhismGender studiesAestheticsReligious studiesAnthropologyHistoryTheologyLiteraturePhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay argues that the dramatic oeuvre of mixed-race Asian Canadian playwright David Yee, which it surveys and classifies for the first time, constitutes a Canadian version of what Turkish born German director Shermin Langhoff calls “postmigrant theatre”—that is, theatre in which immigrant and racialized characters and performers are not limited to their ethnic roles as “others.” Yee’s body of work marks a departure from the drama of intergenerational conflict within immigrant families that has characterized so many of the first generation of plays by the “1.5” and second generations of Asian Canadians. It also diverges from the body of migrant plays that Yana Meerzon has called “cosmopolitan”—work that is marked by displacement, exile, and divided rather than merged subjectivities. Grounded in a combination of the Christian theological virtues, particularly faith, and Buddhist philosophy, particularly understandings of interdependence and coalescence, Yee’s award-winning work asks an engagement on the part of his audience that constitutes an activated, processual investment of spectatorial faith.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.334
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicGerman legal, social, and political studiesFrench-language works237,207