MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286284856 · doi:10.1177/10778004221098988

Wading the Quagmire: Aesthetics and Ethics in Verbatim Theater Act 1

2022· article· en· W4286284856 on OpenAlexaff
Wolfgang Vachon, Joe Salvatore

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Inquiry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsHumber Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMirroringAestheticsEXPOSESociologySalientStorytellingEpistemologyPhilosophyLawArtNarrativeLiteraturePolitical scienceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors draw on their collective decades of theater creating and viewing to expose how they navigate the innumerable ethical and aesthetic enmeshments of verbatim theater. Mirroring the realms in which each writer works, Wading the Quagmire is an edited and manipulated refraction of conversations between the two authors presented through a script-based structure. Each author discusses, describes, and defends their approach, drawing on salient moments from their theater practice, sharing entanglements, and reflecting on the learnings of practice. In the end, the authors resist ethical prescriptions, while identifying the tight rules they work within and the consequences of breaking 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative InquirySame topicTheatre and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207