Listening to the Unspoken, Listening for the Unspeakable: Gender’s Impact on the Musicianship of Female Improvisers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the extent to which one can participate in community without having to sacrifice aspects of one’s identity, through examination of the relation that female musicians in improvising musical ensembles have to their gender identity. I concentrate on the views expressed within a particular interview setting—a roundtable event organized as part of an academic conference on improvisatory communities. This event merits attention because it was organized specifically to discuss the extent to which gender is an obstacle, a topic the invited speakers decided they did not want to address publicly. I look at their resistance to gender identification and pose questions about whether identifying as female—or as feminist—has implications for their ability to succeed in the world of improvised music, and about the extent to which we might see their refusals as fear-based or as principled resistance to a difference that ought not to matter.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".