Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the practice of intergenerational listening and its implications for re-imagining social connection in the COVID-19 crisis. Using an approached based in conversation and exchange facilitated through video-conferencing platforms, the authors critically reflect on the possibilities for developing a new sense of social connection by listening to the everyday sounds (Tuuri and Peltola 2019) of particular spaces. More specifically, the principal aim is to investigate the impact of re-imagining the daily sounds of spaces under locked-down as sources of intimacy, accompaniment, and creativity. These sounds include the ‘buzz’ of a cherished clock, the creak of a screened in porch, or records regularly listened to in a family living room. Supported by literature on ‘listening at a distance’ (Finer 2018) and the ‘sonic imagination’ (Street 2019), we ask: how can intergenerational, socially-distanced listeners engage with sound and space to improvise new forms of social connectivity? Asking these questions, we argue, can inform research and action into the roles that intergenerational listening and improvisation can play in the representation and the valuing an ageing population (Lanphier 2019) in an emerging post-pandemic musical landscape.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.004 |
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".