Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2004, Ki Adams called and asked me if I would agree to give a keynote address to the 2005 Phenomenon of Singing Symposium.He asked me to speak about myself, my life, career, my decision to retire from performing.He asked me, too, to give some advice for young singers beginning in the life of a classical singer.The more I thought about it, the more daunting it became.Just to tell the story of my life, the highlights of my career, the people who have influenced me, and so forth, seemed insufficient.I would need, for my own sake, if not for yours, to make some sense of it all.I would need to decipher some pattern or scheme or unifying thread which would not only make a brilliantly executed speech, but which would also show that I have skilfully and unerringly navigated my way through the labyrinth of my life and career according to a brilliantly conceived master plan.And so, ladies and gentlemen, I have returned again and again in my thoughts to an examination of my life in search of the Key, the Pattern, the Plan.And I've discovered the following: 1. Whenever I had a plan, it seldom worked out the way I thought it would.But circuitous routes are often far more interesting and educational than the original plan provided for.2. If there is a unifying thread in the good things I've done professionally and my reasons for doing them, that thread is words-language-as a means of communication through music.My passion for speech and communication preceded my love of singing.When I was a child, we had a little neighbourhood boy who had a serious speech defect.This distressed me terribly.I spent as much time with him as I could keep his attention, trying to teach him to speak.I could not bear the difficulty he had to make himself understood.Later, in my late teens, I worked closely with two deaf sisters, even learned sign language so that we could communicate better.But what I really wanted was to help them speak clearly.Thus, it was that I decided speech therapy should be my chosen career.That was perhaps my first plan gone astray.I loved languages and studied German, as well as French, and Latin, all through high school.Little did I know then that that would be the most beneficial thing I could
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.015 |
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".