O ouvido absoluto não facilita a memorização de melodias쀀
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumo: Um estudo recente investigou o desempenho de adultos em uma tarefa de memoria musical e mostrou que melodias vocais sao mais lembradas que melodias instrumentais. Usando uma tarefa semelhante, o presente estudo buscou investigar a memoria musical de musicos e de nao-musicos e, em seguida, comparou o desempenho de musicos portadores e nao portadores de ouvido absoluto. Todos os participantes, na primeira fase do experimento, ouviram melodias desconhecidas, apresentadas em diferentes timbres (piano, voz, marimba e banjo). Subsequentemente, os participantes foram testados no reconhecimento das melodias apresentadas na primeira fase quando misturadas a melodias ineditas. Os resultados mostraram, em primeiro lugar, que musicos tem uma memoria para melodias melhor do que nao-musicos. Mostraram tambem que o desempenho de musicos com e sem ouvido absoluto nao difere em uma tarefa de reconhecimento de melodias. E, por fim, indicaram igualmente que, mesmo entre musicos, as melodias vocais sao lembradas com mais facilidade que as instrumentais.�쀀 Palavras-chave: memoria musical, processamento vocal, ouvido absoluto�쀀 !Absolute pitch does not guarantee better memory for melodies�쀀 Abstract: A recent study compared the performance of adults on a task of musical memory and showed that sung melodies are better remembered than instrumental melodies. Using a similar task, the present study investigated the musical memory of musicians and non-musicians and also compared the performance of musicians with and without absolute pitch. In the first phase of the experiment, participants listened to unfamiliar melodies presented in different timbres (piano, voice, marimba, and banjo). Subsequently, participants were tested on the recognition of previously heard melodies intermixed with new ones. The results showed that musicians have better memory for melodies than non-musicians. The performance of musicians with and without absolute pitch did not differ in the recognition task. And, finally, both among musicians and non- musicians, vocal melodies were more remembered than instrumental melodies.�쀀
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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.
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".