Tiptoeing through time : tracing the provenance and conserving Pasticcio costumes from the Royal Winnipeg Ballet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peformance costumes are frequently recycled making original historic samples very valuable for researchers. Documentation on ballet costume construction, cleaning and restoration is limited. This study explores all of these aspects of costuming while focusing on three tutus from the collection of the Royal Winnipeg Ballet (RWB) said to have been produced in the New York City costume shop of world renowned designer Barbara Karinska. The purpose of this study was to examine a piece of material history relevant to Winnipeg's cultural history by exploring its use, significance, components, construction and storage needs. From a material cultural perspective this study has two components: an attempt to trace the provenance of the costumes from the RWB ballet Pasticcio, and a second component of textile conservation. There were five objectives to the study: to verify attribution of the RWB Pasticcio costumes to Karinska, to gain knowledge of historical construction techniques and fabrics in dance costumes, to initiate conservation of costumes with historical significance to the RWB, stabalizing them so they could be displayed, to create a permanent storage system, and finally to provide material to assist the RWB in educating the public regarding the value of costumes generally and Karinska's in particular...
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".