A Distribution of Absolute Pitch Ability as Revealed by Computerized Testing
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
BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT OF ABSOLUTE PITCH (AP) ability over the better part of the last century has strongly suggested that a variety of proficiency levels exists and can only be more comprehensively described with the use of rigorous testing providing precise and unbiased reaction times for all responses. This study describes the design, implementation and validation of a computerized test of absolute pitch and resulting data for 51 musicians, 27 of whom self-reported as AP possessors. The test was sensitive to previously reported differences in accuracy and timing for C major diatonic versus non-diatonic notes and showed a range of performance, from perfect to random, including a substantial number of intermediate levels of proficiency. We discuss the implications of detecting such a distribution of behavior as well as the effect of test design and scoring strategies on that distribution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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