MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4302026760 · doi:10.3138/tric.43.2.f01

Signed Music and Deaf Musicians: A Follow-Up Dialogue Between Youssouf, Witcher, and Cripps

2022· article· fr· W4302026760 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jody H. Cripps, Pamela E. Witcher, Hodan Youssouf

Bibliographic record

VenueTheatre Research in Canada · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce texte du forum se concentre sur le cheminement vers la reconnaissance et l’appréciation de la musique en langue des signes comme art vivant pratiqué par des musicien·nes sourd·es. La musique en langue des signes est une forme artistique d’interperformance émergente, composée de performances musicales lyriques et non lyriques liées à la culture des personnes sourdes qui communiquent par le biais de langues des signes. Le forum fait suite à la participation de trois musiciennes sourdes au colloque Partition/Ensemble 2020, à Montréal, au Québec, à l’été 2020, organisée par l’Association canadienne de la recherche théâtrale et la Société québécoise d’études théâtrales. Cette plénière a réuni des musicien·nes sourd·es de partout au Canada pour partager de la façon dont leur créativité, leurs recherches et leurs études sont mobilisées pour produire des œuvres musicales en langue des signes. La discussion subséquente, à laquelle ont participé Youssouf, Witcher et Cripps, porte sur leur cheminement vers de nouveaux projets. Les artistes ont répondu à trois questions : 1) Qu’avez-vous appris de la plénière? 2) Avez-vous produit de nouvelles pièces musicales en langue des signes? Si oui, décrivez les pièces; et 3) Quels sont vos nouveaux travaux liés à la musique en langue des signes (mentorat, recherche, etc.)? En quoi consistent vos travaux?

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheatre Research in CanadaSame topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207