Bibliographic record
Abstract
That Karlheinz Stockhausen played a crucial role in the musical development of the young Claude Vivier is beyond question. In an autobiographical note written in 1975, Vivier noted: “Born in Montreal in 1948. Born to music with Gilles Tremblay in 1968. Born to composition with Stockhausen in 1972. Indeed, the widespread view is that, during the years he studied formally with Stockhausen at the Hochschule für Musik in Cologne (1972-74), Vivier hero-worshipped the German composer. Widely regarded as one of the leading figures of the international musical avant-garde, Stockhausen had held for two decades a position that, by the time Vivier began formal studies with him, was under assault. The whole system of values for which he stood, musical and otherwise, was being questioned to its foundations, even, in some quarters, reviled and demonised. The relationship between the young Vivier and his distinguished teacher is therefore a complex one. While Vivier evidently fell powerfully under the sway of Stockhausen’s music and ideas and his charismatic and domineering personality, this article explores the effect on him of the changing attitudes toward Stockhausen as the 1970s wore on. This article attempts to paint the complex relationship between the two men, focusing on the years of their closest contact – 1971-1974 – a time when both they and the world around them were undergoing profound transformation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".