The Language of Blindness and its Rapport with Sight: Immersive Descriptive Audio and Rainbow On Mars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rapport defines a certain kind of relationship, one that is not close. Rapport, in other words, defines the closeness and relatability that a relationship should have. This article engages the question, can blindness and sight develop a rapport? It is this question of rapport that animated the 2021 Pop-Up workshop of my play, Rainbow on Mars with Toronto immersive theatre company, Outside the March. The question of building a rapport was not only asked of the entities/characters Blind and Sight but also of the theatre itself and of its audiences. How might blindness and sight come together in the theatre in such a way that does not simulate blindness (blind folds, absence of stage lighting, etc.) nor privilege sight (audio description through headsets for blind patrons only)? This article explores the building of rapport between blindness and sight through the play Rainbow on Mars and the development of, what I call, Immersive Descriptive Audio.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".