Bibliographic record
Abstract
If there is one thing that those of us who never knew Urjo Kareda personally learned from him, it is the importance of nurturing new relationships in, and new approaches to developing, Canadian theatre. The articles in this Views & Reviews section come very much out of that same spirit. We start with Kim Renders’ testimonial to her friend and colleague Svetlana Zylin, a woman who, like Kareda, had a huge influence not only on the people with whom she worked directly, but on the many more of us who knew indirectly of her passion and determination to create a place for women in the burgeoning Canadian theatre scene of the last quarter of the twentieth century. I am one of those who never met Zylin, but whose own interest in theatre was encouraged by stories of how Zylin had made a place for new projects and new people in the Canadian theatre scene and who never lost her passion for life or for art in Canada. Lynne Fernie’s article in CTR 43 on her struggle to be accepted as a director in a world where her Master’s thesis production could be rejected on the basis that a play whose characters are all female (Lorca’s The House of Bernarda Alba) does not reflect the human condition, made her a legend to women of my generation. Her work across the country in the theatres large and small and in theatre institutions like Playwrights’ Workshop and the Manitoba Arts Council allowed many of us to be touched by her vision and generosity. Her death is a great loss to Canadian theatre, but her dedication to creating a world of theatre that can open itself to new visions and new people will have its impact for years to come.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.355 | 0.386 |
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".