Performance Analysis and Chopin's Mazurkas
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
Reporting on work carried out in conjunction with Andrew Earis and Craig Sapp, this paper introduces recently developed approaches to the analysis of recorded music, illustrating them in terms of selected Chopin mazurkas. Topics covered include the stylistic characterisation and aesthetic values of Paderewski's playing of Op. 17 No. 4, contrasted with performances from the last quarter of the twentieth century, as well as relationships between different pianists' interpretations of Op. 68 No. 3. A possible performance genealogy of performances of the latter is proposed, in which recordings by Rubinstein and Cortot play a key role, while clustering based on Pearson correlation of tempo data yields relationships supported in one instance by documented teacher/pupil relationships. Representing the early outcomes of a more extended research project, these findings are encouraging in that it appears possible to draw meaningful conclusions from the consideration only of tempo data. The current phase of the project is also working with rhythmic and dynamic data, which should significantly enhance the potential for objective modelling of musically meaningful relationships.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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