MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4380880743 · doi:10.3138/ctr.114.008

Wrestling with Regionalism in Atlantic Canada: The Playwrights Atlantic Resource Centre

2003· article· en· W4380880743 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Bruce Barton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisitor patternEast coastRegionalism (politics)GeographyResidenceResource (disambiguation)HistoryGenealogySociologyPolitical scienceDemographyPhysical geographyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I will preface my discussion of the Playwrights Atlantic Resource Centre (PARC) with the following caveat. Although I spent over ten years of my adult life on Canada’s East Coast, and held extended residence in three out of four of the Atlantic provinces, I was acutely aware throughout that time of my C.F.A. status. “C.F.A.,” for those who have never visited Newfoundland, stands for “Come From Away.” The term is shortened to “From Away” in the Maritimes, but the condition – and the multiple attitudes it evokes – are, for all intents and purposes, the same. As a “From Away,” one is regularly reminded, in sometimes conspicuous but often subtle ways, of the depth of history, personal and cultural, from which one is not so much cut off as set safely at arm’s length. A “From Away” can experience the East Coast; but it is the experience of the visitor – and, if you’re lucky, the guest. And this, of course, also shapes the degree to which – and the ways in which – one can actually know the East Coast.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0160.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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 Review→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→