MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149022270 · doi:10.7202/017589ar

Visualizing Acoustic Space

2008· article· en· W2149022270 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gascia Ouzounian

Bibliographic record

VenueCircuit Musiques contemporaines · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPavilionNarrativeLoudspeakerDialecticArtOpposition (politics)Acoustic spaceMovie theaterSound (geography)Space (punctuation)Composition (language)Visual artsLiteratureAcousticsHistoryLinguisticsPhilosophyEpistemologyPoliticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores concepts of acoustic space in postwar media studies, architecture, and spatial music composition. A common link between these areas was the characterization of acoustic space as indeterminate, chaotic, and sensual, a category defined in opposition to a definite, ordered, and rationalized visual space. These conceptual polarities were vividly evoked in an iconic sound-and-light installation, the Philips Pavilion at the 1958 Brussels World Fair. Designed by Le Corbusier, the Philips Pavilion also featured a black-and-white film, color projections, hanging sculptures, and Edgard Varèse’s Poème électronique, a spatial composition distributed over hundreds of loudspeakers and multiple sound routes. Typically remembered as a sequence of abstract sound geometries, the author argues that Poème électronique was instead an allegorical work that told a “story of all humankind.” This narrative was expressed through a series of conceptual binaries that juxtaposed such categories as primitive/enlightened, female/male, racialized/white, and sensual/ rational– contrasts that were framed within the larger dialectic between acoustic and visual space.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCircuit Musiques contemporainesSame topicVisual Culture and Art TheoryFrench-language works237,207