MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380928755 · doi:10.3138/ctr.109.014

Visualizing the Music

2002· article· en· W4380928755 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Karen Pegley, Catherine Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperaDramaMusicalArtVisual artsArt historyPerformance artGeorge (robot)Presentation (obstetrics)Performing artsHistoryLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of Canada’s most famous opera productions recently returned to the stage of the Hummingbird Centre in Toronto after an eight-year odyssey of touring that has brought the Canadian Opera Company acclaim from critics around the world. First mounted in Toronto in 1993, Robert Lepage’s staging of Bluebeard’s Castle and Erwartung has travelled to New York, Edinburgh (where it won the prestigious £50 000 Scotsman Hamada prize for drama and music), Melbourne, Geneva, Hong Kong, Vancouver, and Cincinnati. As is by now well-known, Lepage bases his theatrical creation on the use of “resources,” ranging from pieces of text to familiar objects to artistic images in other media. What is striking in his stage direction of these two short operas, restaged for this production by François Racine, is the way Lepage treats the music itself as a resource. In this staging it would seem that the musical patterns of the score guide the creation of a series of visual images much more than do the verbal signs of the libretto. The result is a complex presentation of visual and aural images that strikes the audience as fantastically original without ultimately challenging the rather traditional messages of these psychoanalytically inspired operas.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207