An empirical study of end-user programmers in the computer music community
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computer musicians are a community of end-user programmers who often use visual programming languages such as Max/MSP or Pure Data to realize their musical compositions. This research study conducts a multifaceted analysis of the software development practices of computer musicians when programming in these visual music-oriented languages. A statistical analysis of project metadata harvested from software repositories hosted on GitHub reveals that in comparison to the general population of software developers, computer musicians' repositories have less commits, less frequent commits, more commits on weekends, yet similar numbers of bug reports and similar numbers of contributing authors. Analysis of source code in these repositories reveals that the vast majority of code can be reconstructed from duplicate fragments. Finally, these results are corroborated by a survey of computer musicians and interviews with individuals in this end-user community. Based on this analysis and feedback from computer musicians we find that there are many avenues where software engineering can be applied to help aid this community of end-user programmers.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it