MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073553455 · doi:10.7202/038442ar

Choisir le chemin moins fréquenté : regard sur la musique traditionnelle

2009· article· fr· W2073553455 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lisa Ornstein

Bibliographic record

VenuePort Acadie Revue interdisciplinaire en études acadiennes · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au cours du xxe siècle, la musique et les danses traditionnelles régionales et communautaires ont presque complètement disparu autant au Canada qu’aux États-Unis. La majorité des musiciens locaux ont soit délaissé leur legs musical devenu marginal en faveur d’un répertoire plus à la mode soit simplement cessé la pratique de leur instrument. Il y a cependant des musiciens qui ont consacré leur vie à maîtriser et à perpétuer leur héritage musical. Pourquoi ces personnes ont-elles choisi un chemin si peu fréquenté? Nous allons aborder cette question à travers la vie de deux musiciens qui ont suivi cette route : Louis Beaudoin, violoneux franco-américain de Burlington (Vermont), et Louis « Pitou » Boudreault, violoneux de Chicoutimi (Québec). Ces hommes, issus de familles de musiciens, ont vécu leur jeunesse dans des milieux où la musique et la danse traditionnelles jouaient un rôle social fort important au sein de leur famille et de la collectivité. Malgré la disparition de ces contextes, ces deux musiciens ont continué d’apprécier la richesse de leur vécu, ainsi que la spécificité et la valeur de leur héritage musical. Comprendre leur loyauté et leur plaisir à l’égard de cette musique, c’est aussi entrevoir le pouvoir évocateur et transcendant des arts traditionnels.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePort Acadie Revue interdisciplinaire en études acadiennesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207