MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283450390 · doi:10.36510/learnland.v15i1.1081

A Spotlight on Research-Based Theatre

2022· article· en· W4283450390 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueLEARNing Landscapes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsThe artsTheatre studiesSociologyVisual artsWork (physics)ArtEngineeringDrama

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“Tell me about your research.” How does one begin to convey the importance of our life’s work—our research? Enter stage right, Research-based Theatre, an innovative, arts-based methodology that takes research data and brings it to life, by showing, rather than telling. In this article, we tell the story of how Research-based Theatre first came to be, and why it is especially well suited to the contemporary challenge of showcasing diverse and marginalized voices. We also share a short scene that illustrates the methodology in practice. We conclude by offering ways Research-based Theatre can be a meaningful approach for pedagogy and community-engaged initiatives.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.267 · 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