MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2908932933 · doi:10.7202/1055194ar

L’écoute musicale comme construction du commun

2019· article· fr· W2908932933 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Makis Solomos

Bibliographic record

VenueCircuit Musiques contemporaines · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans la tradition musicale idéaliste, l’écoute s’apparente à la plongée dans l’univers singulier de l’oeuvre musicale, conçue comme monade où chaque élément de la réalité a sa représentation : écouter signifie s’immerger dans une intériorité qui forme un monde en soi. La conséquence de cette forme d’écoute est une relative surdité à son environnement immédiat. Certaines formes actuelles d’addiction aurale, bénéficiant notamment du productivisme consumériste, renforcent jusqu’à la caricature cette surdité. C’est sans doute pourquoi de nombreux artistes d’aujourd’hui, et notamment ceux gravitant autour de l’écologie acoustique ou sonore, renversent la perspective et pensent l’écoute comme manière de se mettre en relation avec le monde. Cela passe souvent par une relative disparition de l’oeuvre (au profit de processus) et par un recentrement sur l’acte même d’écouter. Ce renversement n’est pas seulement un choix esthétique, il est aussi politique : il met en avant l’idée que l’écoute peut être construction du commun.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.320
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.024 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Other

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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCircuit Musiques contemporainesSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207