MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1486784069

Flexible Control of Composite Parameters in Max/MSP

2008· article· en· W1486784069 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy A. Place, Trond Lossius, Alexander Refsum Jensenius, Nils Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic Technology and Sound Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceControl (management)Computer musicWork (physics)Order (exchange)MusicalIndustrial engineeringHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringEngineeringVisual arts
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fundamental to the development of musical or artis-tic creative work is the ability to transform raw materi-als. This ability implies the facility to master many facets of the material, and to shape it with plasticity. Computer music environments typically provide points of control to manipulate material by supplying parameters with con-trollable values. This capability to control the values of parameters is inadequate for many artistic endeavors, and does not reflect the analogous tools and methods of artists working with physical materials. Rather than viewing parameters in computer-based systems as single points of control, the authors posit that parameters must become more multifaceted and dynamic in order to serve the needs of artists. The authors propose an expanded notion of how to work with parameters in computer-centric environments for time-based art. A pro-posed partial solution to this problem is to give parameters additional properties that define their behavior. An exam-ple implementation of these ideas is presented in Jamoma. 1.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo)Same topicMusic Technology and Sound StudiesFrench-language works237,207