MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995257031 · doi:10.1177/0096144219893683

The Making of Music Venues: Inquiries into Global Urban History

2019· article· en· W2995257031 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cornelia Escher, Martin Rempe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Urban History · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)EntertainmentTasteSociologyPoliticsAestheticsArchitectureStyle (visual arts)Media studiesUrban historyVisual artsAdvertisingSocial sciencePolitical scienceArtBusinessPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Music venues form nodal points around which to explore networks of people and the materialization of styles, trends, and ideas. Moreover, they work as condensers, bringing together the domain of aesthetic experience with social, political, and economic factors. Our special section takes these observations as a starting point to study these particular urban spaces, with a special focus on the first half of the long twentieth century. By highlighting agency, the interplay between music and architecture, and the human experience and use of music venues, we will address the making of such venues and their entanglement with urban cultures. Examples include a wide range of venues that provided high culture as well as mass entertainment in Nashville, Montreal, Ankara, and Havana. On a methodological level, the section broadens the field of urban history and at the same time points to some empirical limits of a global urban history. The focus on music venues thus serves as a means to inquire into the transformations of taste, experience, agency, and style in urban cultures, which, in some respects, withstand a “global” explanation.

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)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.024
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Urban HistorySame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207