Bibliographic record
Abstract
Special Issue - Call for Papers Reimagining Gender Amid sometimes overwhelming currents of social and political upheaval, our shared understandings of gender have been deeply challenged. In this tumultuous biopolitical climate, it has become urgent, even imperative, to address these challenges creatively and compassionately. What has become of gender, and what can gender become? How are our perceptions, conceptions, and receptions of gender changing, developing, and adapting in this troubled and troubling era, a time of suppression and repression, but also of affirmation and disruption? Critical studies in improvisation, both as a field of inquiry and as a mode of study, offers powerful potential means to investigate, engage with, and transform our convergent and diverging approaches to gender in this complex present day. How might gender emerge re-imagined?Critical Studies in Improvisation / Études critiques en improvisation invites contributions to a special issue on emergent understandings of gender and improvising bodies. Scholars, critics, artists, and community members are warmly invited to submit work addressing any of the following questions: How can (co-)creative improvisational practices help us attend to emergent and conflicted forms of embodiment? How can the improvising arts offer important tools to engage with and to enact change? How do the improvisational arts celebrate, negotiate with, and even call into question the complexities of positionality and the shifting matrices of gender? How are genders both undone and remade in the fluidities and transitive counterflows of improvisational/improvised/improvising work? How might improvisers articulate/practice/touch on/sound the nascent means to come to care for others? How does improvisation give us possible tactics and strategies to confront ableism around gender identities? How might improvisation offer ways to mitigate risk, to accompany each other, to bear witness to confrontations with hegemonies of exclusion and repression? How are gender roles and equity at play in improvisatory performances? Can improvisation offer any kind of safer space, or make room for creative risk, in an increasingly hostile political climate? How do artistic genres that rely on improvisation create opportunities and/or barriers for women, and for non-binary and transgender individuals? Submissions for this special issue may include, but are not limited to: reflective articles, scholarly essays, ethnographies, podcasts, photography, and multi- and intermedial pieces. Early career researchers/emergent scholars across all disciplines are warmly encouraged to submit proposals. The deadline for submissions is October 15, 2025. Submissions can be submitted through the journal’s online portal by following the submission guidelines available through this link. For inquiries about this issue, please contact Sam Boer, the Managing Editor of CSI/ÉCI, at csi-eci@uoguelph.ca.
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 | 0.005 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.845 | 0.831 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".