Designing a Playground for Romeo and Juliet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The production of Romeo and Juliet took place at the Telus Theatre in Vancouver from 21st to the 30th of January 2010 as part of the UBC 2009-2010 program. It was directed by Catriona Leger, costumes by Carmen Alatorre, lighting by Conor Moore, original music by Mischelle Cuttler and Patrick Pennefather. Set design was done by myself as the main topic for this thesis. The word playground in the title points to both the play culture associated with the theatrical event as well as well as the physical space for play. Building off of the notion of the childhood playground, I sought to illuminate the theatrical space as one which is literally a place of play-not only as a space in which one views a play, but also a space for actors to physically play (that is to explore and create). The stage would not be a constricting place which limits the actors movements, but rather, a flexible and open space to perform ( a necessity, given the physicality of the show). The playground is for kids as the playground is for buffoons in my set. As I desired to deviate from the traditional notions of theatrical space, I also sought to break the conventions of traditions of Shakespearean staging, creating a non specific place or time and inviting the spectators into the sense of festivity. The shape of the theatre in combination with the design allowed for the actors to use the whole space whether it is in or between the audience, on top of a balcony or in the grid. Since this side-play was a necessary factor in eliminating the fourth wall, the space needed to be a seem-less integration between audience and actor to facilitate such interaction. Thus, the set was designed to crawl into the audience's space. By extending the existing architectural elements of the theatre and working them into the design the theatre became an unencumbered, expansive space for play.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.005 |
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".