A Forum for the Practice of Musicology in Ireland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With Mary Immaculate College’s long history of educating teachers setting an appropriate atmosphere, the fourth SMI annual conference sought to bring together the increasing number of music researchers in Ireland. While the emphasis was on delegates from the island itself, a healthy number of countries and universities were represented. Over one hundred delegates from twenty-five universities in Canada, England, France, Germany, Spain, the USA, and all over Ireland presented papers on a broad range of topics: from liturgy and chant to the structures, politics and aesthetics of twentieth century music, from musical analysis to explorations of music as performance, and opening up from individual Irish musical personalities and social values to the use of music in public broadcasting and wider national and ethnic identities. As Dr Gareth Cox, the conference organiser, noted, in the three years since the inaugural SMI conference the number of papers presented has doubled. With this expansion, the SMI has continued in its quest to be ‘a forum for the practice of musicology, reflecting the gamut of musical research in Ireland.’1 The seventy papers given utilized a wide range of sources, from the academic to the anecdotal and from original manuscripts to archival recordings, and the varied approaches to these presentations reflected the diversity of approaches to musicology in general in Ireland today. The 2006 SMI Conference was a celebration of the growth, diversity and good standing of research in music throughout the country. But, considering that these official gatherings of Irish musicologists are still in their infancy, what can one envision for their future?
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 | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.027 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.017 |
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".