MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738451453 · doi:10.3986/dmd04.1.01

Responsory tones at Klosterneuburg

2014· article· en· W2738451453 on OpenAlex
Debra Lacoste

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDe musica disserenda · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMedieval Academy of America
KeywordsMelodyModalIdentification (biology)LinguisticsSpeech recognitionMathematicsHistoryArtLiteratureComputer sciencePhilosophyMusical

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite their formulaic nature, the tones sung to the verses of responsoria prolixa in the medieval office pose certain problems of identification and classification. Some contain neume patterns which suggest a modal association but do not match the “standard” tones, some are similar to the standard tones but deviate at cadences or other significant points, and others appear to be newly-composed. With reference to three twelfth- and fourteenth-century antiphoners from the abbey of Klosterneuburg, I begin by identifying melodic features which are usual in the majority of responsory tones for this liturgical centre. Then, in order to provide a clearer understanding of verse-tones and their variants, I examine some of the more elaborate responsory-verse melodies sung at Klosterneuburg.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.188 · 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