La scène musicale anglo-québécoise : institutionnalisation, mutations et représentations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article interroge le lien entre la plus grande reconnaissance attribuée à une partie de la scène musicale anglo-québécoise et le développement d’institutions et d’organismes artistiques et culturels anglophones au Québec. Certaines représentations sociales quant au mythe des deux solitudes tendent à se reproduire dans le monde des arts, mais à se transformer aussi dans le cas de coproductions franco et anglo-québécoises qui attirent un public nouveau, encore mal circonscrit, un public bilingue et principalement montréalais. Nous abordons ce sujet en traitant de l’identité anglo-québécoise et de son rapport à la culture, en décrivant plusieurs aspects de l’institutionnalisation et de la professionnalisation des artistes anglophones du Québec depuis les années 1960, puis en tentant d’identifier les mutations récentes de la scène musicale anglo-montréalaise en abordant la question de la relève et de la diversité culturelle.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 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".