MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038724113 · doi:10.7202/1018577ar

The Loosening Role of Polyphony: Texture and Formal Functions in Mozart’s “Haydn” Quartets

2013· article· en· W2038724113 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntersections Canadian Journal of Music · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of OxfordUniversity of CambridgeMcGill University
KeywordsMOZARTPolyphonyContrast (vision)Texture (cosmology)PhraseComputer scienceArtCognitive scienceArtificial intelligenceLiteraturePsychologyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay demonstrates that texture can act as a form-defining factor by focusing on one specific textural type: imitative polyphony. Mozart’s six quartets dedicated to Haydn illustrate this claim. Building on William Caplin’s form-functional theory and his distinction between tight-knit and loose organization, imitative texture is shown to serve two purposes: as a loosening device, and as a means of textural and phrase-structural contrast. To deepen our understanding of polyphony’s formal and expressive roles, two new concepts are proposed: contrast pair and imitative presentation. The contrast-pair principle is then explored in select Viennese quartets by Mozart’s contemporaries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it