A scale value for the balance between stage and pit and inside an historical opera house
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite its recognized importance, the balance between the singer and the orchestra inside an opera house has received minor attention in the past. In fact, after the fundamental work of Meyer [J. Meyer, ‘‘Some problems of opera house acoustics,’’ Proceedings of 12th I.C.A., Vancouver, 1986, pp. 13–18], who explained why the solo singing voice can compete with the orchestra, only partial results were reported on this perceived attribute. In this work a reference scale to assess the balance inside an historical opera house is achieved by means of listening tests inside a controlled room. Two scaling experiments were performed based on the acoustical data measured inside an historical opera house, the Teatro Comunale di Ferrara, Italy. By doing so all of the relevant acoustical characteristics of a typical Italian-style opera house could be exactly reproduced. Acceptable values do not differ much in the stalls and in the boxes and are within 2 dB(A) to +2.3 dB(A). The transfer of the findings to other types of opera houses is discussed, too.
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".