MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900187056 · doi:10.30535/mto.24.3.10

Performers as Creative Agents; or, Musicians Just Want To Have Fun

2018· article· en· W2900187056 on OpenAlexaff
Edward Klorman

Bibliographic record

VenueMusic Theory Online · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMOZARTCelloCreativityArtPiano sonataMeaning (existential)Visual artsMusicalConcertoSuiteLiteratureAestheticsPsychologyPianoArt historyHistorySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, I explore conceptions of creativity in musical performance in both popular and Western art musics. I examine Cyndi Lauper’s iconic performance of the song “Girls Just Want To Have Fun,” which transformed the meaning of Robert Hazard’s original demo of the same song. I then analyze performance choices relating to structural cadences in Mozart’s Sonata in A minor, K. 310; Bach’s Cello Suite No. 1 in G major, BWV 1007; and Beethoven’s Sonata in ".fn_flat("A")." major, op. 110.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.042
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMusic Theory OnlineSame topicMusicology and Musical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207