MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312866430 · doi:10.1121/10.0015695

The evolution of Blackbird Studio C

2022· article· en· W4312866430 on OpenAlexaff
Peter D’Antonio, George Maassenburg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCeiling (cloud)LoudspeakerStudioComputer sciencePianoBass (fish)Presentation (obstetrics)AcousticsArchitectural engineeringMusicalHuman–computer interactionVisual artsMultimediaTelecommunicationsArtGeologyEngineeringPhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting in 2002 John and Martina McBride set out to create several small rooms, each one unique in design and technology. George Massenburg (GM) was asked to coordinate the design of one of the rooms and given the mandate to make it the most advanced room imaginable. GM specified that the room should offer an accurate monitoring environment for more than one listener, a reasonable presentation of how materials will sound in multiple circumstances outside of the space, a flexible environment that doesn’t compromise musical and artistic contexts, an accurate representation of virtual sources (sources spread across one or more loudspeakers) to more than one listener, a room with linear, supportive ambience, which as much as possible, has near-equal decay rates across as much of the frequency spectrum as possible. In June 2004, GM contacted Peter D’Antonio with a proposal to collaborate on a new surround music monitoring/control/recording room, which became Studio C. The resulting diffusor design covering all four walls and ceiling, with corner bass absorption, will be presented. Since opening the room has been used successfully and has recently installed a Dolby Atmos system. The presentation will also present user perceptions from 2005 to the present.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.029

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.321 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207