Bibliographic record
Abstract
One day, I was cycling along a road in my home town of Udine, in the north-east of Italy, when a long row of posters advertising the national debut of Robert Lepage’s Polygraphs La macchina della verità caught my attention. (The subtitle was added to the Italian translation of the play by theatre critic Franco Quadri.) In that moment, memories surfaced: my days in Canada when I studied for my MA at the Department of Drama at the University of Guelph and, particularly, the day when, as part of my studies, I went to Toronto with classmates to see Lepage’s The Seven Streams of River Ota. Before then (1995-1996), I had never been exposed to Canadian theatre, and I knew very little about it; that was the reason why I left Italy to carry out my studies in Canada. So little was known then in Italy about Canadian literature and, in particular, about Canadian drama. For most Italians, Canada was seen as an adjunct to the United States. Seeing these posters in my home town, less than five years after I’d studied in Canada, struck me: I had gone to Canada to learn about Canadian drama, and now a Canadian play was being produced in Italy. Needless to say, I immediately booked a ticket to see a performance in the run at the Teatro Nuovo Giovanni da Udine from 2-5 March 2000. The premiere was a great success, with most of the audience responding enthusiastically. The audience seemed to know Robert Lepage’s reputation as an outstanding Canadian playwright and practitioner because the leading theatre company in Udine, Centro e Servizi e Spettacoli di Udine, had already hosted three of his plays, namely Les aiguilles et l’opium, La géométrie des miracles and Elsinore.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.068 | 0.013 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".