Intermédialité et création musicale : l'exemple des Wirkunst
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce texte consiste en une réflexion sur l’intermédialité (rapports inter-arts) comme fondement d’une musique narrative, au regard d’une série de huit œuvres intitulée Wirkunst. Les Wirkunst sont tous basés sur des œuvres provenant des arts visuels, de la littérature ou du cinéma. Dans la première partie, j’explique d’abord les notions de sémiologie sur lesquelles s’appuient mes recherches. Ensuite, je présente la « grille d’interprétation musicale des œuvres d’art » à partir de laquelle je transforme ma réception d’une œuvre d’art en œuvre musicale. Enfin, je propose une définition de la narrativité musicale inhérente aux Wirkunst en insistant sur le domaine de la perception, notamment sur la pluralité des niveaux de lecture possibles, conceptuels et sonores. 
 
 This text looks at intermediality (links between arts) as a foundation for narrative music, in a series of eight works entitled Wirkunst. The origins of the Wirkunst stem from other visual arts, literary or cinematographic works. Thus, the first part opens with semiotics theories on which my research is based. Then, I present the “musical interpretation’s grid of artworks” which I use to transform my perception of an artwork toward a musical work. Finally, I propose a definition of musical narrativity inherent to the Wirkunst with an emphasis on the field of perception and, more specifically, their many levels of reading, conceptual and sonorous. 
 
 Article reçu le 17/12/2011; accepté le 07/03/2012
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it