MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preface

2023· book-chapter· en· W4389749776 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Savran

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Culture and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusicalKISS (TNC)Performance artArt historyArtVisual artsMedia studiesLiteratureHistorySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book was inspired by a profusion of sources. One was provided by Ji Hyon (Kayla) Yuh, a Korean student in my 2008 musical theatre seminar who wrote a final paper about a Seoul production of Michael Bennett’s Dreamgirls (1981), which was in fact a far-flung, out-of-town tryout for an upcoming New York revival. I was intrigued, to say the least, to learn how Korean performers had transformed a musical I always assumed to be too embedded in US racial politics to travel. A second was Barrie Kosky’s super-gay 2008 production of Cole Porter’s Kiss Me, Kate (1948) at the Komische Oper Berlin, with which I was completely intoxicated. The production’s scale—conceptually, musically, theatrically—was so mind-blowing that I wanted all my musical theatre friends to drop what they were doing and fly to Berlin to see it. A third spark for the book came from Ken Nielsen, one of my first students at the CUNY Graduate Center, who in 2011 completed a dissertation on productions of Tony Kushner’s Angels in America (1993) in Denmark and Germany. Ken’s project helped me to recognize that studying the reception of US-American theatre abroad could provide fascinating insights into the love/hate relationship between US culture and the rest of the world.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4500.265

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAsian Culture and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207