Exams in Basel. Jacques Handschin’s Correspondence with Gustav Reese, Karl-Allan Moberg and Heinrich Besseler
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Статья представляет публикацию с комментарием неизвестного прежде письма (1937 года) американского музыковеда Густава Риза российскому швейцарцу Жаку Гандшину. В этом документе молодой Риз выражает желание защитить диссертацию в Базеле и просит Гандшина принять его в число своих учеников. На основании анализа нескольких корреспонденций Гандшина в статье рассмотрены причины его отказа. Представленные материалы позволяют по-новому взглянуть на взаимодействие американской и западноевропейской музыковедческих школ второй четверти ХХ века. In a letter to Russian Swiss Jacques Handschin dated 7.10.1937, young American musicologist Gustav Reese expressed his wish to become Handschin’s student and to defend his thesis in Basel. Based on Handschin’s academic correspondence, the article comments on Reese’s proposal and discusses possible reasons for Handschin’s refusal. Reese’s request and Handschin’s letters are taken as examples for the interaction between American and West European musicological schools in the second quarter of the twentieth century.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.078 | 0.022 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".