MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1615007190

Electric picking, Ethnic Spinning: (Re)Defining the "folk" at the Winnipeg Folk Festival

2008· article· en· W1615007190 on OpenAlex
Sija Tsai

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMUSICultures · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusic History and Culture
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamFace (sociological concept)Folk musicFolk cultureEmbodied cognitionEthnic groupEthnographySociologyFolk songMedia studiesHistoryVisual artsAnthropologyArtLiteratureSocial sciencePolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The old debate What is music? carries a fresh face at the Winnipeg Folk Festival, where it is embodied in a web of considerations regarding economic concerns, availability of mainstream and world artists, and the growing cultural and stylistic diversity of artists who identify as Canadian. Founded in 1974, the festival has produced 35 years of public discourse surrounding the way in which the term folk music should be defined. Using media coverage and ethnography, this paper explores how the programming changes at the WFF have helped alter public conceptions of over the past three decades.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.189 · 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