MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380928484 · doi:10.3138/ctr.131.003

Bridging Opposites – Drama and Science – in the Plays of John Mighton

2007· article· en· W4380928484 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Christopher Innes

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaPerformance artMythologyTheatre directorArt historySociologyArtVisual artsLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In terms of drama that deals with science, the award-winning Canadian playwright John Mighton is almost unique in being a practising scientist as well as a professional playwright. Indeed, he holds two PhD degrees: one in philosophy and one in mathematics. He has published a highly regarded book on mathematics, under the title of The Myth of Ability, and is the founder and coordinator of a highly innovative school program designed to help students who are having difficulty with math, called JUMP (which stands for “Junior Undiscovered Math Prodigies”). He has also written six plays to date, which have been staged widely across Canada as well as being performed in Europe, Japan and the United States. One of these, Possible Worlds, has been turned into a film by the Canadian director Robert Lepage; and Mighton is currently working with Lepage again, adapting for the stage a science book, titled The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory – a title that demonstrates the ambitiousness of Mighton’s aims. He has also won a number of prestigious national prizes, including no fewer than two Governor General’s Awards for Drama. And, in 2006, he was awarded the Siminovitch Prize (the most prestigious and valuable theatre award in Canada).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicArtistic and Creative ResearchFrench-language works237,207