Le Livre dou Voir Dit de Guillaume de Machaut et la transition de la tradition orale vers la tradition écrite en musique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the middle of the twentieth century, musicologists attempted to understand when and how medieval music shifted from an oral tradition to a written one. On this question Gregorian chant was the first repertoire to which they turned their attention. Beginning in the 1990s, some musicologists attempted to show that the art of memory was also the framework of the polyphony of Notre-Dame, of Guillaume de Machaut, even of that of certain fifteenth-century repertoires, which should hitherto be fundamentally considered as products of oral composition. The great majority of these studies pertain to musical analysis. However, there witnesses to the textuality of music also exist that have been neglected. One of these is the Livre dou Voir Dit by Guillaume de Machaut, in which Guillaume gives us insights into the role of music notation in his compositional and authorial process. The analysis of this source demonstrates how careful we should be to take into account historical witnesses when considering the orality and textuality of medieval music.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".