MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897449679 · doi:10.1121/1.5068294

Human-technology interfaces with the tactile metronome

2018· article· en· W2897449679 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan Hesselink

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetronomeComputer scienceSynchronizingHuman–computer interactionAestheticsPerforming artsCommunicationPsychologyVisual artsRhythmArtTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The story of the metronome is the story of humankind coming to terms with evolving conceptions of time and coordination as mediated through technologies of the modern age. What began as a tool for regulating and documenting tempo soon became the temporal yardstick by which aspiring musicians strove to emulate in practice and performance. In the early twentieth century the metronome took on the new role of synchronizing live musicians with moving images on a screen (the so-called “click track”), and as the century progressed the metronome would come to dictate the manner in which musicians related to each other in the recording studio and in live events. This paper focuses on the latest manifestation of this phenomenon, the tactile metronome, looking at how vibrotactile stimulation is being used for temporal synchronization as well as an enhanced sense of embodiment for the performer, including haptic feedback. Four modern products tailored to performing musicians will be introduced and analyzed in the overlapping contexts of synchronization and embodiment. It is my argument that the metronome has now come full circle, returning a sense of human feel to the experience of making music.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207