Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dmitry Shostakovich wrote three ballets: The Golden Age , op. 22 (1929–30), The Bolt , op. 27 (1931) and The Bright Stream , op. 39 (1935). Despite the fact that Shostakovich, though young, was already well known and showing great promise, the brief initial stage life of these scores meant that they were for a long time not properly appreciated or studied. Officially, they were identified as ‘formalistic’ and alien to Soviet art, which is partly why they remained ‘the least explored part of his musical legacy’. However, a quarter of a century after these unsuccessful premieres, fragments of Shostakovich's ballet music began to be used quite widely. Three ballet suites for small symphony orchestra were often performed at concerts and individual numbers from the scores were included in ballets subsequently created from their music from them, as will be seen. In the 1920s and 1930s, the former Imperial Ballet went through a period of transition. Its nineteenth-century repertoire, along with its content and aesthetics, was regarded as antiquated and inappropriate for a revolutionary era. To encourage the creation of new works, at the beginning of 1929 the Leningrad Theatre of Opera and Ballet (formerly the Mariinsky) announced a competition for a new ballet scenario, set in the present day. Its demands were typical of the late proletarian period: ‘Themes must be predominantly contemporary … subject matter could be the Civil War or socialist construction … [it must be] formed from everyday material and, in part, from ethnography … [from] the peoples of the SSSR … The spectacle must make use of mass movement.’ Among the genres envisaged were the lyrico-heroic poem, comedy, satire, the contemporary fairy tale, survey and even the Soviet revue.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.008 |
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".