Inevitable Reckonings, Or, Where Do We Go from Here?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exploring the evolution of inter-cultural and transnational perspectives within the full Canadian Theatre Review ( CTR) archive, the co-authors probe CTR’s historical engagement with nationalist sentiments, colonial legacies, and immigrant experiences across its fifty-year history. Our in-depth archival research highlights CTR’s gradual shift toward greater inclusion of BIPOC, inter-cultural, and/or transnational voices, while addressing systemic barriers and historical erasures. In this sense, the study traces the trajectory of CTR’s thematic focus from nation-building to broader transnational and inter-cultural exchanges, showcasing its role in fostering meaningful dialogue that extends substantially beyond the aesthetic realm. Nevertheless, this study also critically questions the vestiges of a settler-centric approach and considers its implications, while advocating for increased accessibility and representation, particularly of transnational voices from the Global South. Through perhaps employing a slightly utopian lens, the article poses structural questions while seeking to provoke dialogue around the urgent demands that interconnected global crises place on us, as artists and citizens of reimagined, solidarity-based communities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.029 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".