Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The transcript of this actual discussion (from the 2008 Guelph Jazz Festival Colloquium) between musician-authors Vijay Iyer and Paul D. Miller continues a virtual discussion carried out in the pages of a collection of essays which Miller edited, entitled Sound Unbound: Sampling Digital Music and Culture (2008). Both Iyer and Miller contributed essays to that volume, and here they turn up the volume on their respective notions of improvisation, sometimes converging and sometimes diverging in interesting ways. In that earlier text, Miller presents a kaleidoscopic verbal collage of anecdotes and theoretical snippets to invoke the nature of his anthology-cum-mixtape: “Sound Unbound is about volume—of content as sound bite, of attention with no definite deficit, of memory as a vast playhouse where any sound can be you. Press 'play' and this anthology says ‘here goes’” (Miller 9). Miller employs a similarly play-ful mode of presentation in his dialogue with Iyer, and like their ostensible subject matter (improvising digital culture), Iyer and Miller remix and sample ideas and arguments from a broad collage of 20th Century cultural and political traditions. The conversation, complete with its “vexations” (to cite an Eric Satie composition that Miller brings up in the following pages), transformed into a compelling musical dialogue later in the evening when the duo performed in a concert setting at the Festival. One feature of the discussion that particularly interests us is the distinction drawn by Iyer and Spooky between what it means to improvise in broad social terms versus improvisation understood primarily in musical or artistic terms, and the difficultly in separating those categories. As Iyer states in the beginning of the dialogue, many musicians from this “Great Black Music” tradition (as the members of the Art Ensemble of Chicago dubbed it) have noted that improvisation is a necessary survival tool, and their music functions as a sonic and artistic version of daily improvisational practice: “In other words,” Iyer asserts, “you might say that there are degrees, layers or levels to what we call ‘improvisation.’ There's a primal level at which we learn how to just be in the world, and then there's another level at which we're responding to conditions that are thrust upon us.” Based on this provisional definition of what it might mean to improvise, Iyer’s comments set a slightly cautionary tone to the conversation, which Miller proceeds to remix into a tricksterish set of variations on a theme. As Miller puts it, “I think the dialogue between me and Vijay here is not only between different systems of production of music, but how improvisation itself is the bridge between radically different compositional strategies.” Moderated by Globe and Mail music critic Carl Wilson, the discussion traversed about an hour’s worth of give and take, listening and collaborating, between two of today’s most important musical voices (both of whom are also, it bears repeating, devoted to actively constructing their own definitions of what they do as musicians via a wide range of published writings). The collaboration also featured a few responses to the colloquium audience members’ questions, exemplifying the kind of call and response at the heart of both analogue and digital improvisations.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle