MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380874387 · doi:10.3138/ctr.115.001

Canadian Theatre and Monuments

2003· article· en· W4380874387 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Joanne Tompkins

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShadow (psychology)Power (physics)ArtValue (mathematics)HistoryArt historyTheatre studiesVisual artsDrama

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The representational power that the Stratford Festival holds in the history of contemporary Canadian theatre cannot be overestimated. Stratford has long been a monument of (and to) theatre in Canada, partly because of the distinctive architectural design of the Festival Theatre, and partly – perhaps more likely – because of its manufactured story of origin.1 In Performing Canada: The Nation Enacted in the Imagined Theatre, Alan Filewod explains how Stratford came to be “the template which ... governed the dominant model of professional theatre structures in Canada” (56) and Canadian theatre itself. This monumentalization is all the more interesting given that, for Filewod, Stratford has actually “contributed little to the overall development of theatre in Canada” (57) beyond a location for symbolic value. It does, however, provide the basis for a useful oppositionality: Canadian theatre – developed to some extent in the shadow of Stratford – now casts shadows itself. This paper focuses on three plays that open dialogues with monumental images of the nation: The Death of General Wolfe by Brian Quirt, Angélique by Lorena Gale and Sled by Judith Thompson.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.012
Science and technology studies0.0150.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicTheatre and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207