IMPRO-CINÉ : la transversalité des processus cinématographiques par l’usage des méthodes d’Improvisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The starting point for this research project is the use of contemporary improvisational theater techniques in the making of films. Transversal is that which crosses or intersects a work, that which edifies certain parts that are situated in the work, that which is directed obliquely. Transversality in this case is a transfer of theatrical methods to film creation, as the improvisation space is displaced: the audience is removed and cameras are placed in front of the actor-creators; the stage is converted into a film set; and the thrill of live action is replaced by the challenge of not having a second take. The methods for training improvisers, based on a specific part of Impro whose aim is the creation of stories, are almost the same as in theater, yet the training exercises and techniques must be adapted in consideration of the cinematic environment. What I call Contemporary Improvisation is a set of techniques, exercises and methods that aim at the act of improvising as an end, for a show - the final artistic work is formed by the scenes created live in front of an audience. Improvisation facilitates human coexistence, at least through its power to make people more receptive to each other, while respecting each person's place to speak. Improvisation can therefore be said to imply a transversal approach, as it crosses the different spheres of our relational activities, which are a strong source of inspiration for the creation of stories, at all times and in all communities of our society, in the family, social, professional or state sphere. What I intend to demonstrate, based on a few contemporary researchers and my experience as director of the improvisational theater troupe "Teatro do Nada" for over fifteen years, is that improvisation can inspire all stages of the filmmaking process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".