MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380880806 · doi:10.3138/ctr.122.010

Challenging Bodies: Very Physical Theatre

2005· article· en· W4380880806 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kathleen L. Irwin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt, Technology, and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDanceExcellenceScope (computer science)Movement (music)SPARK (programming language)Visual artsEvent (particle physics)SociologyAestheticsArtComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canada Summer Games, based in Regina in August 2005, and the University of Regina’s Transdisciplinary Fund are enabling the production of a unique performance experiment called Challenging Bodies. This project, part theatre, part dance, part multimedia event, attempts to investigate the link between the spark of creative imagination and the act of fully realized physical expression. As well, it will attempt to problematize the notion of physical excellence by celebrating movement, however limited in scope, and enhancing and amplifying that movement through sophisticated technology. Indeed, inasmuch as the project is developing within a university environment, it is also part research, which attempts to intersect with communities that do not, typically, engage in shared dialogue. A multidisciplinary collective of theatre and intermedia artists, academics, choreographers, musicians, computer scientists, kinesiologists and otherwise-abled performers is initiating a process of exploration and experimentation that will, by presenting a high-calibre performance inclusive of physical difference, challenge spectators and provide an intriguing alternative to the competitive athleticism of the Summer Games.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.210 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicArt, Technology, and CultureFrench-language works237,207