Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis quelques années en Europe, création musicale et programmation d’opéra ont cessé de s’ignorer. L’assouplissement des pratiques compositionnelles depuis les années 1970-1980 autorise certains des compositeurs les plus talentueux de leur génération à mesurer leur écriture aux fortes contraintes inhérentes à la réussite, impératif catégorique, d’un nouvel ouvrage à l’opéra. Malgré ce cadre contextuel commun à toutes les oeuvres de l’opéra contemporain, les dramaturgies musicales divergent fortement entre, d’une part, un répertoire tendant à reproduire une stylistique traditionnelle et, d’autre part, des oeuvres s’appropriant les expériences de la modernité dramatico-musicale des années 1960-1970 et cherchant à les faire fructifier dans l’environnement culturel contemporain. Ainsi, les dernières années ont vu la naissance de grands opéras contemporains au spectacle exclusivement instrumental et scénique, un catalogue foisonnant d’ouvrages revendiquant leur appartenance au genre, apparemment ressuscité, de l’opéra.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".