MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508849804 · doi:10.7202/1051398ar

Music Shaped in Time: Musical Sense-Making Between Perceptual Immediacy and Symbolic Representation

2018· article· en· W2508849804 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark Reybrouck

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sémiotiques · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmediacyArticulation (sociology)PerceptionMusic psychologyRepresentation (politics)MusicalMusic and emotionPop music automationComputer scienceTime perceptionMusicalityPsychologyCommunicationMusical compositionMusic historyVisual artsArtEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What does music signify? And how do listeners make sense of music as a collection of sounding stimuli? A common way is to study the structure of the music, conceiving of music as a self-reflective system with elements that refer mainly to themselves. This is a position that deals with music in computational terms relying on symbols that can be manipulated at a virtual level of imagery, without any connection to the music as it sounds. Music, however, is also a temporal and sounding art. It can be described in acoustic terms, providing a totally objective rendition of the sonorous articulation through time. As such, there is a major distinction between “in time” and “outside of time” descriptions of the music, with the former relying on the first hand sounding stimuli and the latter on second-order symbolic replicas of the sounds.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.014
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.267
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sémiotiquesSame topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207