Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le grand espace tonal de Cyril Achard, un ouvrage très intéressant et original, se situe à la croisée des chemins entre théorie et pratique, traité et manuel pédagogique, et également entre musique savante d’écriture et musiques audiotactiles – jazz, pop, rock, musiques populaires brésiliennes. Il propose un modèle général d’interprétation de la tonalité sous le nom de « grand espace tonal » qui se distancie radicalement de la chord-scale theory et de ses simplifications, lesquelles ont marqué la pédagogie du jazz depuis les années 1970 et la montée dans cette musique d’une culture de la partition auparavant inconnue, favorisée par la circulation croissante des fake books et l’explosion du nombre des institutions d’enseignement du jazz. Si cette construction n’est pas exempte de critiques (comme l’est toute entreprise de cette envergure), elle n’en constitue pas moins une contribution à la théorie harmonique contemporaine d’un grand intérêt.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".