MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2966865768 · doi:10.4324/9781315573892-20

Claude Vivier at the end

2016· article· en· W2966865768 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan Goldman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndian subcontinentMusicalStyle (visual arts)Art historyHistoryQuarter (Canadian coin)ArtLiteratureEthnologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

General features and reception The Quebec composer Claude Vivier (1948-1983) is one of the most important creators of concert music in Canada, and has come to be considered one of the most significant and original composers of the last quarter of the twentieth century. His highly personal style in emblematic works like Lonely Child (1980) and Journal (1977) fuses many of the dominant currents of twentieth-century art music, from the serialist thought inherited from his teachers Gilles Tremblay and karlheinz Stockhausen to the techniques associated with Spectral composition. Like other composers of his generation working in Montreal at the same time (including John Rea, Jose Evangelista and Walter Boudreau), he had a deep and durable fascination with non-European musical cultures, particularly those of the Indian subcontinent, Southeast Asia and especially the island of Bali. Works by Vivier are as likely to have names of Asian locales in their titles as a piece by Messiaen is likely to bear a species of bird in its name (for example, Zipangu – the name Marco Polo used to refer to Japan – Bouchara, Shiraz, Pulau Dewata – the Balinese nickname for the island of Bali, etc.).3

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0910.038

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis→French-language works237,207→