Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors que la fin du xixe siècle confirme l’établissement de certains genres musicaux comme la symphonie et le concerto, ainsi que de certaines formations instrumentales comme l’orchestre moderne et le quatuor à cordes, le xxe siècle voit apparaître des géométries instrumentales inédites, essentiellement motivées par de nouvelles nécessités esthétiques. Pour bien des compositeurs de l’après-Seconde Guerre mondiale, ces combinaisons instrumentales originales devenaient une nouvelle référence en matière d’expression musicale, mais aussi une manière de se soustraire aux connotations socioculturelles qui se rattachent aux modèles hérités de la tradition. Le recours à des formes ou genres du passé a souvent été l’objet de questionnements, voire de critiques plutôt sévères, mais qu’en est-il de ces enjeux aujourd’hui? Dans quelle mesure le médium détermine-t-il le message? Cette enquête sonde l’opinion de sept acteurs du milieu musical, compositeurs, chefs d’orchestre, directeurs artistiques et interprètes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".