MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380874238 · doi:10.3138/ctr.123.007

The Long and Winding Road: Touring Canada with Two Planks and a Passion Theatre

2005· article· en· W4380874238 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ken Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual artsSightArtArt historyAestheticsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“Where the Hell am I?” I awake in state of panic. The sheets cling to me in a clammy tangle, the heater next to my bed roars and my partner doesn’t respond to my call for assistance. Where the hell is she? I try to find a light switch, a lamp, but I don’t know what direction to reach in. My hands run up and down walls without any discernible features. No switch. A bedside table? I find it with my left knee, knocking over a bottle onto the carpet below, the cold water running in a torrent around my bare feet. No lamp. Some distance away, a tinny clock-radio erupts midway into “Don’t Worry, Be Happy,” oblivious to my predicament. I follow the sound across the bed to another table, this one with a lamp — but where’s the switch? On the bottom, on the top, where the hell is the damn switch? Finally, success. A blinding light reveals a room that resembles a crime scene photo, minus my silhouette in chalk. The smell of obsolete Chinese takeout and dirty laundry permeates the room with an evil potpourri, and I move to the curtains and throw them open to reveal … a brick wall. Where am I? I dial “0” to get some information and hang up before a voice answers. What am I going to do? Ask, “Where am I, please? I’ve lost track?” That would guarantee an uncomfortable visit from guest services.

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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0370.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1260.015

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207