MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112551333 · doi:10.17561/grove.v27.a8

Neil Young: The Man Who Fell to Earth

2020· article· en· W3112551333 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pedro Javier Romero-Cambra

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Grove - Working Papers on English Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusic History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstinctFellRest (music)ArtThrowingArt historyAestheticsLiteratureHistoryVisual artsEngineeringCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian singer songwriter and composer Neil Young (b. 1945) has been puzzling the minds of his listeners for decades. His work is all about finding new shores and throwing old ways and patterns to the nearest ditch as soon as possible. He finds the idea of repeating himself simply abominable. His experimentation, sometimes brilliant, sometimes erratic and irritating for his lifelong fans exudes a great capacity for risk taking and cliché breaking. His instinctive artistic integrity and his premeditated scorn for the demands of the modern music industry are legendary. This article aims at explaining some of the constants which mark him out from the rest of the pack; not just as an artist, but also as a man.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.150 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Grove - Working Papers on English StudiesSame topicMusic History and CultureFrench-language works237,207