Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Drama Department at the University of Calgary has produced an increasing number of Canadian plays since it was founded in 1967. We have never had an explicit policy regarding the production of Canadian or Alberta plays. The founding principle of Department production choices was to mount four plays per year from the various periods of western theatre history over a four-year cycle and to study these plays in the Dramatic Literature and Theatre History classes. Each year, a modern play and a contemporary play were to be produced, plus two plays from more distant historical periods. Students would, therefore, study theatre history in the context of production and, over four years, would cover all of western theatre history. The reason for establishing this model lay in the antipathy of the early members of the Department toward the typical chronological theatre history survey courses, which usually had no relation to plays being produced. Several of the first members of the Department had an interest in directing plays from all periods of theatre history, so the model worked fairly well for several years. Over time, with faculty turnover and the increasing interest of new faculty in Canadian theatre history, this model began to break down. Another major factor was the introduction of graduate programs in directing and design. Graduate students direct their thesis productions in the department's main season, and they typically are neither prepared for nor interested in directing period pieces. Successive generations of graduate students have demonstrated increasing interest in Canadian theatre. Furthermore, after the Canadian theatre history course was added to the curriculum in 1982, it was taught for many years by scholars who tended not to direct productions in the department.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.122 | 0.028 |
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".