Bibliographic record
Abstract
The search for authenticity has long held sway over early music practices, dictating the direction of both scholarship and performance. Throughout the development of the early music movement, an emphasis on historical accuracy and production of an Urtext has increased dramatically, until the search for authenticity has taken on the air of a religious quest. However, critics and performers have recently begun to question authenticity's hold over text and performance. Once lauded authentic performances are now sometimes criticized for excluding creativity, accessibility and communication. Even Richard Taruskin, the acknowledged leader of performance practice criticism, comments that "a movement that might, in the name of history, have shown the way back to a truly creative performance practice has only furthered the stifling of creativity in the name of normative controls" (in Butt 1996, 325). The cult of authenticity is now beginning to be perceived as a "symptom of 20th century modernism" (Taruskin, in Butt 1996, p.325), and postrnodem thinking, which has for some time influenced the academic sphere of musicology, is finally beginning to break through the stronghold of early music performance.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".