Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Donald Barthelme’s hilarious and provocative short story, “Me and Miss Mandible,” a thirty-five-year-old man who has “misread” important cultural signs as an adult finds himself back in grade six, for re-education. This time around, it is clear, he must learn to read the subtext, the messages implied, as opposed to those overtly stated, by his culture. Remembering a surreal but formative experience, the protagonist takes an important first step in this complex decoding: “I kept wondering why. Then something happened that proposed a new question…. I wondered: Who decides?” (60). In many ways, these two questions — Why? Who decides? — are key to understanding the unique culture of Theatre for Young Audiences (TYA) in Canada. Young theatre audiences, in turn, may be key to an accurate picture of the country itself. As Leslee Silverman, artistic director of Manitoba Theatre for Young People, points out, young audiences have replaced adult audiences as the true cross-section of Canada (Personal interview). Because it tours to all parts of the country, plays to young people and their caregivers and is primarily performed in and for schools whose students are drawn from a wide range of economic, social, geographic, linguistic, religious, ethnic, intellectual, physical and family backgrounds, TYA boasts not only one of the largest but also the most diverse and representative audience in the country. This audience is important. But why is theatre important for this audience?
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.054 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".