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
This study analysed survey responses from 1652 New Horizons International Music Association (NHIMA) musicians in the United States and Canada to better understand older adults' experiences in making music. The purpose of this study was threefold: (a) ascertain the extent of NHIMA musicians' musical backgrounds and their current involvement in music making; (b) determine perceived benefits of music making in NHIMA groups; and (c) establish a baseline for a longitudinal study that monitors NHIMA musicians' health compared with similar adults who are non-musicians to document relationships between health changes and music making. NHIMA musicians can be typified as approximately 70 years old, almost exclusively Caucasian, of average health, college educated, with above average incomes and with previous playing experience on their instruments in high school. They play their instruments on average for an hour a day. Their comments reveal that most of the respondents cite emotional well-being and benefits, followed by physical well-being, cognitive stimulation and socialization benefits. This large sample study thus corroborates the findings of previous efforts using smaller samples and provides baseline data for future research.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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