The Invisible Score: Phenomenology and the Excess of Dance Improvisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the intersection of embodiment, perception, and aesthetic experiences in dance through the lens of phenomenological theory. Drawing from Maurice Merleau-Ponty's perceptual phenomenology, Jean-Luc Marion's notion of phenomenological excess, and Jean-Louis Chrétien's responsorial phenomenology, I propose variations of audiencing informed by my lived/living experiences as a dance improviser. Audiencing reveals dance improvisation as a response to a call that urges one to transcend personal boundaries. This call is felt in ways that resonate with a developed phenomenology of audiencing as an act of responsiveness. The paper posits that dancing inherently exceeds any effort to fully comprehend or encapsulate it. Beginning with the contextualization of audiencing within media and performance studies, the discussion extends to a phenomenology of improvisational audiencing and an analysis of the dance's phenomenological excess. The paper concludes by introducing the concept of the ever-present invisible or intangible score: the excess of the dance that cannot fully be captured in words.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".