Bibliographic record
Abstract
St. Augustine tells the story of a pirate captured by Alexander theGreat."How dare you molest the sea?" asked Alexander."How dare you molest the whole world?" the pirate replied."Because I do it with a little ship only, I am called a thieJ you, doing it with a great navy, are called an emperor."' When I first read this dialogue from classical antiquity it somehow seemed to apply as a metaphor more closely to the discipline of musicology than I wanted to admit: more closely to my own research and, definitely, to my teaching style.The books I had read on my "ascent" up the mountain of musicological learning presented composers as the "great" versus the "second-rate" and, the "development" of styles, genres, forms as a Darwinian "survival of the fittest" since what came before was not as good as what developed (especially in terms of an early composer's style versus his late style).It seemed that the "facts" were not to be questioned either in terms of interpretation nor selection of material.Could the discipline of musicology in its assertions about musical values be personified as an emperor?Or was ithe really a pirate, a thief?Both?Or neither?Struggling with how I should interpret the ever-burgeoning number of tomes in musicology, how I should interpret my own research and how was I going to reconcile my final decisions with the ever-expanding ' Noarn Chomsky, Pirates & Emperors: International Terrorism in the Real World (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1987), p. 9.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".