Le milieu musical québécois et ses réseaux. Le cas des bourses du gouvernement attribuées aux compositeurs (1919-1929)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’histoire musicale du Québec ne se résume pas à une simple enumeration chronologique de noms et d’oeuvres. Plusieurs musiciens ont construit des réseaux de sociabilité locaux, nationaux et internationaux, souvent interdisciplinaires,-qui ont façonné la pratique musicale. Ces relations se sont particulièrement développées durant la première moitié du XXe siècle. Nous étudions ici un cas particulier : les rapports de force des réseaux clérical, politique et intellectuel dans l’attribution des bourses du gouvernement aux compositeurs entre 1919 et 1929. En l’absence d’objectifs clairement énoncés justifiant ces bourses, certains intellectuels font pression pour appuyer la création musicale de Rodolphe Mathieu, alors que le clergé favorise Eugène Lapierre à la direction d’un conservatoire sous son contrôle et que les appuis politiques de Claude Champagne le mènent à la direction d’un conservatoire d’État.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 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".