MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232817236 · doi:10.21785/icad2021.038

The Sound of Our Words: Singling, a Textual Sonification Software

2021· article· en· W4232817236 on OpenAlexaff
Esteban Morales, Kedrick James, Rachel Horst, Yuya Takeda, Effiam Yung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonificationGRASPComputer scienceSoftwareMeaning (existential)Human–computer interactionVisualizationNarrativeAuditory displaySound designMusicalSound (geography)Artificial intelligenceVisual artsArtProgramming languagePsychologyLiteratureAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As visualization struggles to grasp the intricate and temporal networks of meaning found in textual data, sonification emerges as a creative and effective way of representing language. Accordingly, this paper seeks to introduce Singling, a textual sonification software that allows users to create and manipulate auditory representations of a text's lexicogrammatical properties. To achieve this, we first present Singling's main features and interface. We then discuss an example of using this sonification software to explore—both analytically and aesthetically—three different poems. Overall, this paper seeks to introduce researchers, educators, and artists to the many possibilities of Singling and the practice of textual sonification, which includes data analysis, multimodal and collaborative narrative creation, and musical performance to name a few.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.007

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreSoftware

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207