Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parmi ses multiples thèmes de numéros, le cinéma musical hollywoodien a attaché une importance particulière à ceux représentant des instruments et instrumentistes dans un acte de performance, au point d’en faire une attraction type, que cet article examine sous un double angle historique et esthétique. Ces numéros proviennent d’abord d’un positionnement de Hollywood par rapport à deux médias concurrents : le théâtre musical de Broadway et la radio. Ils permettent à l’industrie du cinéma de proposer un spectacle propre tout en bénéficiant de la circulation des musiciens. Ces numéros se construisent ensuite autour d’une poétique précise, relevant d’emprunts à des traditions iconographiques et d’un travail sur la musicalité visuelle. On peut ainsi mettre au jour des formes communes au-delà des styles de musique concernés : le jazz, le swing, les musiques latines ou classiques. Les numéros à instruments se présentent ainsi comme un des lieux essentiels du syncrétisme culturel pratiqué par le cinéma classique américain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 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".