MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792823278 · doi:10.1080/14626268.2018.1423997

Conducting the in-between: improvisation and intersubjective engagement in soundpainted electro-acoustic ensemble performance

2018· article· en· W2792823278 on OpenAlexaff
Doug Van Nort

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Creativity · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic Technology and Sound Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionGestureImprovisationComputer scienceArticulation (sociology)Human–computer interactionMovement (music)ChoreographyIntersection (aeronautics)Active listeningCommunicationPsychologyDanceVisual artsArtificial intelligenceAestheticsEngineeringArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines an approach to ensemble performance, guided by a form of improvised conducting that functions both as communication with musicians and an embodied interface for transforming the ensemble sound. The framework for analysis draws upon the concepts of distributed creativity, its intersection with a listening-centric approach to meaning creation and an embodied cognitive stance on the development of semantic identifiers in music/movement practice. In the described project, tensions are negotiated between acoustic and electronic sources, and between bottom-up structured improvisation and top-down guidance via Soundpainting conducting. These continuums are amplified and explored through another layer of shared articulation, as machine learning has been applied to recognition of the composer/conductors gestures as well as to continuous mapping of conductor movement to sound transformations. These techniques allow for an intersubjective engagement between all members of the ensemble, wherein sound and movement gestures are co-constructed.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.016
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital CreativitySame topicMusic Technology and Sound StudiesFrench-language works237,207