Bibliographic record
Abstract
How far jazz has come.Once routinely associated with swiveling hips, various drugs of choice, and unruly goings-on, it now has moved to the heart of the cultural establishment.Today, jazz is supported by major foundations, taught at most centres of higher learning, embraced by powerful institutions such as the Lincoln Center and the Smithsonian Institute, and honoured by the White House; there are no more dingy dives for this music.For some, this development represents the kind of attention that jazz deserves.For others, it is the death knell for a once-living art form.The literature on jazz has been going through a similar shift.Once the purview of record collectors, journalists, and enthusiasts (including writers such as Stanley Dance, Martin Williams, Dan Morgenstern, Max Harrison, Ralph J. Gleason, William Russell, and George Hoefer), jazz is now fully embraced by the academy.I imagine that, by the reckoning of the editors of Uptown Conversation, these earlier commentators belonged to the "old jazz studies."They shared a belief in the value of jazz which was, at the time, largely viewed as inferior by proponents of "art" music.They also shared an obsession with documenting the lives and careers of jazz musicians.Few of them had academic credentials or formal musical training.There were some exceptions, of course, including ethnomusicologists Richard
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".