MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036561793 · doi:10.5206/notabene.v13i1.8590

Waringin: Recording a Composition with Gamelan Salukat, a Crossroads of Music and Culture

2020· article· en· W3036561793 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oscar Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueNota bene · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Musicological Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposition (language)Visual artsImprovisationEthnographyMusicologyFeelingSubject (documents)Perspective (graphical)HistoryAestheticsSociologyPsychologyArtLiteratureAnthropologySocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the subject of numerous studies over the last century, Balinese music has been presented in a particular light. In the 21st Century, it has been a priority for Western musicologists to renew our outdated or inaccurate conceptions. This paper joins that discourse by presenting an intercultural project as an opportunity to bring the perspective of Balinese musicians under consideration. Recently, I undertook a recording project in Bali, working on my composition “Waringin,” written for Gamelan Salukat. Gamelan Salukat is a 20-30-person bronze ensemble with a radical tuning system, comprised of young musicians (~18-30 yrs.) from around the Ubud region of Central Bali. The project became a crossroads of musicianship, uncovering many intriguing tensions—notation versus oral learning, counting rhythms versus feeling or embodying rhythms, and composition versus improvisation. The following ethnographic account explores how the young Balinese musicians tackled the problems we faced and discusses what implications these newly formed strategies have for Balinese music in a contemporary setting where East and West, self and other, participant and observer are no longer divided.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.115 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNota beneSame topicDiverse Musicological StudiesFrench-language works237,207