Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following Ian Pace's excellent introduction to the music of Helmut Lachenmann, hopes were entertained that similar articles might appear introducing the work of other contemporary German composers, in particular Wolfgang Rihm. The problem is that any article on Rihm is out of date before it is published, even with respect to general trends that have emerged in his recent output. Unlike most composers, Rihm has avoided a mid-life creative crisis, not least by devoting groups of works to particular issues: thus an initial impression may well encourage the belief that his creative personality has several distinct manifestations. This fact alone indicates that Rihm has little in common with Lachenmann. While Lachenmann's music is underpinned by the principles of dialectic, and his rich fantasy tends to be contained within the intellectual framework governing his compositional processes, Rihm's spontaneous approach suggests an uninhibited absorption of influences from every quarter, past and present. We need look no further than some of the items in the recently published two-volume collection of Rihm's lectures, discussions, and introductions to various works, which include reflections on composers as unlikely as Louis Spohr.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.010 |
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".