MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380928342 · doi:10.3138/ctr.135.006

Staging the Impossible: SaBooge Theatre

2008· article· en· W4380928342 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Craig S. Walker, Jodi Essery, Kayla Fell, Andrew Shaver

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpression (computer science)AestheticsArtPsychologyVisual artsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CW: Let’s start with the name. SaBooge is a bastardization of a French expression, “ca bouge,” which translates roughly as “it moves “That certainly describes something of the intense physicality commonly employed in the work of SaBooge Theatre. But, as always, nuances inherent in the contexts in which the French expression is used discourage such a blunt translation. For example, one might, in exasperation, warn a naughty child, “Ne bouge pas!” (don’t budge!); one may say of someone rather old-fashioned and hidebound in his outlook that “ses ideé’s n’ont pas bougé”; one says to an idle complainer: “il faut se bouger pour obtenir satisfaction.” So, impertinently restless, intellectually dynamic and indefatigably industrious: these are also good descriptors of this company. Finally, one says of a cloth that does not wear out that “ce tissu ne bouge pas.” Although the company itself is anything but wearing’ in that sense, one might say that the company has always been ready to wear out an idea to their satisfaction and move on.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207