MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2211838659

The Power of Russian Music Spirit: Keys as Color in Rachmaninov’s Piano Etudes-Tableaux Op.33

2015· article· en· W2211838659 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruoxu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonority hierarchyPianoConnotationMusicalPsychologySet (abstract data type)Context (archaeology)ArtLinguisticsComputer scienceLiteraturePhilosophyHistoryArt history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intention of this study is to explore the collection of Etudes-Tableaux for piano solo by Sergei Rachmaninov (1873-1943) for the composer’s unique manipulation of tonal areas as the basis of the Romantic concept of musical color. What is the harmonic linkage that binds these etudes together internally as a set? In order to understand how Rachmaninov uses tonal areas and keys to invoke a special quality, let us first define what we mean by “color.” Traditionally, the term “color” refers to the texture and density of sonority, hence sonic color. In this case, the notion of “color” is related to the way tonal areas and keys play a significant role in the musical context by creating a desired atmosphere and an emotional quality. Intrinsic harmonic qualities of tonal regions are essential to Rachmaninov’s musical expression, according to which color areas may be seen as tableaux or sonic pictures. The term Tableau in Rachmaninov’s double title to signify a “picture” or “painting” also strongly reflects the composer’s use of musical color to suggest some kind of pictorial connotation.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicMusicology and Musical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207