MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083288000 · doi:10.1093/mind/fzq024

Antithetical Arts: On the Ancient Quarrel Between Literature and Music, by Peter Kivy.

2010· article· en· W2083288000 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMind · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAesthetic Perception and Analysis
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and Design
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCLARITYJargonArgument (complex analysis)PhilosophyAestheticsVariety (cybernetics)The artsFace (sociological concept)LiteratureEpistemologyArtLinguisticsVisual artsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analytic philosophers who write on music face a significant challenge: To write insightfully with precision and clarity, eschewing jargon and pretension, about the art which is perhaps most recalcitrant to verbal description. The audience may be philosophically very sophisticated (yet know little about music), or may be specialists in music (but little acquainted with philosophy). Trickiest of all, they may know a good deal about both. Peter Kivy has met these challenges handily in several books over the past thirty years or so and the current robust health of the philosophy of music is a testament to his good influence. Kivy’s latest book is a defense of ‘enhanced formalism’ — his name for the position he has developed and defended over the years. Essentially this is the view that absolute music is to be understood and appreciated as a structure of sound that may be expressive of ‘garden variety’ emotions. Although parts of the book have appeared separately it hangs together as a sustained argument.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.238 · 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