MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244090694 · doi:10.3138/utq.77.4.1095

Keys to the Kingdom: The Search for How Best to Understand and Perform the Songs of Tagore

2008· article· en· W4244090694 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William Radice

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIndian History and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLyricsAppealCentralityLiteratureAestheticsHistoryPhilosophyArtLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Searching for a way to understand the songs of Rabindranath Tagore that reflects their centrality in his creative work and goes deep, as it were, into his creative nervous system underlies this essay. Both the lyrics and the music of Tagore's songs [Rabindra-sangit] were composed by him and thus are intimately bound together. For appreciating the distinctive qualities of the songs a four-fold classification – based on characteristics of the four parts of a typical song in the Rabindra-sangit corpus – is proposed and sketched. There are also suggestions (and an appeal for higher performance standards) as to why, if he were alive today, Tagore might feel that his songs are being misinterpreted and misunderstood – but need not be in future.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicIndian History and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207