MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133050565

Considering Process: Investigating Practice and Methodology in Filipinx Canadian Theatre Creation

2022· dissertation· W7133050565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marissa Elaine Orjalo

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typedissertation
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Process (computing)Action researchKnowledge creationTheatre studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering Process: Investigating Practice and Methodology in Filipinx Canadian Theatre Creation explores the pre-colonial Filipinx concept of pagkikipagkapwa—being ultimately connected to one another and the world around us—in the processes of Filipinx Canadian artists. Through interviews with research partners, we observe the concept of pagkikipagkapwa in action as it highlights collaboration and joy in the creation of theatre making. Beginning with a brief explanation of pagkikipagkapwa, this project guides readers to find pagkikipagkapwa in the directorial process of Nina Lee Aquino, the collaborative writing processes of Miss Orient(ed), People Power, Through the Bamboo, and Pedestal Pinays, as well as the individual writing processes of Marie Beath Badian, Marie-Leofeli Barlizo, and Leon Aureus. As witnesses to these methodologies, this thesis calls us to consider the present-day processes of racialized artists as adaptations of an ancestral understanding of art making. These processes reflect a pre-colonial understanding of theatre and performance, which ultimately serves as invaluable knowledge in the creation of culture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0560.060
Scholarly communication0.0210.006
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicTheatre and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207