MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235570235 · doi:10.3138/ctr.173.012

By Fire

2018· article· en· W4235570235 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ken Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual artsPassionPerforming artsArtTheatre studiesAestheticsSociologyMedia studiesDramaPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance venue of Two Planks and a Passion Theatre is 178 acres of varied farmland that surrounds the Ross Creek Centre for the Arts, near Canning, Nova Scotia. Forest, fields, and ponds provide creative contexts that influence the selection of works for development and production. After working as Artistic Director in this place for the last eleven years, I have a new perspective on theatre and its possibilities for immersion. Much of the work we create in Canadian theatre depends on the infrastructure we have built in order to deliver it. The theatre spaces built since 1950 have as much influence on our programming choice as personal taste, appetite for risk, or the over-arching social trends. In this paper I explore the notion that if the theatre is to be capable of bringing new perspectives and experiences to our audiences, we must attempt to strip it of the distractions and gimmicks that make the theatre a cardboard cut-out that resembles our contemporary world. When we consider immersion as our theatrical goal, we must ask ourselves: immersed into what? My central argument will be that surrounding audience members is not the same as engaging them.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5620.269

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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