In-Between Soundscapes of Vancouver: The newcomer's acoustic experience of a city with a sensory repertoire of another place
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ‘in-betweenness’ of a newcomer, which derives from being familiar with multiple sensuous geographies and living through diverse cultural regimes, creates for them an almost experimental situation. Their lack of habitual memory and ‘soundscape competence’ (Truax 2001) of the new city is full of creative potentials in terms of acoustic experience and expression. In order to explore the dynamics of such contexts in their richness, we need to develop sensorily rich methods of inquiry. In this regard, the field of soundscape studies has been offering performative methods for sensory methodologies including ethnography. On the other hand, by incorporating a sensory ethnographic process, we can also address some issues like cultural and social sensitivity within the field of soundscape composition. I drew upon methods such as the soundwalk and sound diary, which were turned into performative expressions by employing approaches to a soundscape composition and developing a collaborative and process-oriented sound installation. In this paper, I will be discussing the recent sonic ethnographic and artistic projects I developed in Vancouver,1and how these projects can contribute to our understanding of cultural soundscapes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".