Writing Liszt: Lina Ramann, Marie Lipsius, and early musicology<sup>1</sup>
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
Recent disciplinary histories in musicology have ignored any possible contribution of women during the field's formative years. Nevertheless, women were active as musicologists in Germany in the late nineteenth century, as witnessed in the scholarly work of Lina Ramann and Marie Lipsius (La Mara). Excluded from advanced musicological study of canonic topics, they independently turned their scholarly interests and talents toward study of the most commanding, if also controversial, figure of the time: Franz Liszt. His feminization by opponents made this act by Ramann and La Mara doubly transgressive. However, it was just this Liszt that allowed them to write themselves, even as they engaged in musicological work. It is no coincidence that both scholars, who were known in their day as having long‐term same‐sex partners, created a Liszt in harmony with their own subject positions.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 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