La notation du timbre instrumental : noter la cause ou l’effet dans le rapport geste-son
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le timbre instrumental peut être défini à différents niveaux qui interagissent entre eux : quel instrument est joué, par quel interprète, suivant quels modes de jeu et dans quelles conditions de diffusion. Sur la partition, dans la tradition occidentale, on peut préciser le timbre, notamment par l’entremise des modes de jeu. La notation du timbre désiré (l’effet) passe alors par la notation du geste qui permet de le produire (la cause). La spécification du timbre peut aussi s’effectuer par l’entremise de descripteurs verbaux (tels que chaud, rond, brillant, métallique, etc.) faisant appel à des métaphores sensorielles multimodales. Ainsi, la notation se situe à différents niveaux, en amont ou en aval de la relation geste-son : le compositeur peut choisir de noter la cause (le geste, le doigté), l’effet sonore à produire (type d’attaque, rondeur du son) ou spécifier son impact sur l’auditeur (le caractère).
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".