MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A tale of two scenes: civic capital and retaining musical talent in Toronto and Halifax

2011· article· en· W2095853686 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Brian J. Hracs, Jill L. Grant, Jeffry Haggett, Jesse Morton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCreativityContext (archaeology)MusicalMusic industrySocial capitalRestructuringSociologyCreative industriesWork (physics)GentrificationPublic relationsCapital (architecture)Visual artsPolitical sciencePsychologyEconomic growthSocial scienceHistoryMusic educationSocial psychologyEconomicsArtPedagogyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although Toronto has been the centre of the Canadian music industry for many decades, recent interviews reveal that industrial restructuring may be affecting the choices that musicians make about where to live and work. In an era of contemporary independent music production, some smaller city‐regions, such as Halifax, Nova Scotia, are becoming more attractive to musicians. This article explores the ways in which musicians consider the economic and social dynamics of city‐regions in making their location choices. Musicians recognize Toronto's advantages in size and economic opportunity, yet those in the music scene described it as an intensely competitive and difficult work environment. By contrast, respondents in Halifax talked about a supportive and collaborative community that welcomed newcomers, encouraged performance, and facilitated creativity. In the contemporary context, where independent musicians are adopting new strategies to pursue their vocation, communities high in civic capital may gain an advantage in attracting and retaining talent .

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations38
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207