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
In recent years, various forces within and outside the music industry - record producers, hardware and software suppliers, and Internet service providers - have created techniques and tools that allow recording studios in remote locations to be networked in ever more complex and intimate ways. The effort behind the creation of the ‘network studio’ is, in part, the result of an overall progression in the historical development of the tools, architectures and practices of the contemporary recording studio. Studios do not exist in a musical or cultural vacuum, however: traditionally, music scenes, session musicians, and local aesthetics and practices have played an important role in the development of specific approaches to recording and have had an influence on the resulting sounds. But the rise of the network studio raises fundamental questions about such relationships and about the role of space and place in sound recording and, in this regard, can be considered as an expression of larger tendencies described within various theories of globalization. This paper addresses how the emergence of the network studio, with its emphasis on standardized technologies and practices and its reliance on the virtual space of network communications, may have an impact upon and/or work alongside conventional recording studio practices
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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