MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910797548

Microtonal procedures in 'Sailing to Byzantium'

2005· other· en· W2910797548 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian Inglis, Rachel Barnes

Bibliographic record

VenueMiddlesex University Research Repository (Middlesex University Of London) · 2005
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusicalTone (literature)PoetryThe artsVisual artsQuarter (Canadian coin)ArtHistoryLiteratureArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This short paper introduces and categorises the mictrotonal writing in my composition Sailing to Byzantium for solo recorder player (1999, published Chipping Norton 2016: Composers Edition). It was delivered at UK Microsoft 1 (Riverside Arts Centre, Walton-on-Thames, 15 October 2005), with live musical excerpts performed by Rachel Barnes. (In the text version of the paper these are rendered as musical illustrations from the manuscript facsimile score). Introductory material covers sources of inspiration for the piece and the use of microtones in it, including the poetry of W B Yeats, the Sequenzas of Luciano Berio, the communicable language of Olivier Messiaen, and Tibetan chant. Three categories of microtonal procedure are then identified: those used structurally using special alternative fingerings; 'bent' pitches used colouristically; and written-out glissandi. Six examples are provided in total, covering all three categories. Pitch-divisions are generally limited to quarter-tones, but eighth-tones are also deployed on occasion. Quarter-tone fingerings are based on Michael Vetter's Blockflütencshcule (Vienna 1983: Universal Edition); eighth-tone fingerings were extrapolated from Vetter's chart via an empirical process of trial-and-error.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMiddlesex University Research Repository (Middlesex University Of London)Same topicMusicology and Musical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207