La réception des symphonies de Haydn à Paris. De nouvelles perspectives de recherche…
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La postérité a retenu de l'époque classique les trois figures musicales emblématiques que sont Haydn, Mozart et Beethoven en reléguant souvent le premier à l'ombre des deux autres. Or, entre 1780 et 1820, Joseph Haydn connut en Europe - en France tout particulièrement - un engouement qui dépassa de loin ceux de ses deux grands contemporains. Plus que des ouvrages épisodiques comme La Création ou le Stabat Mater (censé rivaliser avec celui de Pergolèse), ses symphonies témoignent d'un succès bien curieux : destinées aux concerts, elles furent progressivement utilisées dans des cadres artistiques aussi variés que les entractes de la Comédie Française, les bals de la Cour impériale ou les préludes de certaines tragédies lyriques. Ultime « dramatisation » de ce répertoire symphonique, l'utilisation de mouvements détachés comme partie intégrante des ballets-pantomimes modernes de l'Opéra de Paris confère à cette musique un potentiel expressif qu'elle ne revendiquait pas à l'origine.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 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".