MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321845945 · doi:10.1386/ijcm_00065_2

Inclusion for all; all for inclusion

2022· article· en· W4321845945 on OpenAlex
Roger Mantie

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Community Music · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicResearch in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)CompassionSociologyPedagogyMusicalAestheticsPsychologyVisual artsGender studiesPolitical scienceArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The title of this editorial speaks to the aspirational goal of inclusion for proponents and practitioners of community music. Inspired by feminist care ethics, Janelize Morelli’s article connects care with love, compassion and Lee Higgins’s oft-cited concept of hospitality. Seán Doherty’s article provides a personalized insight into a composer’s struggles to reconcile conservatory-trained musical thinking with the participatory goal of promoting social inclusion for asylum seekers in Ireland. Lotte Latukefu and Irina Verenikina’s article extends the dialogue on street music by describing the informal learning efforts by the Australian organizers of HONK! Oz. The articles ‘The CI Music Hour’ and ’Exploring approaches to community music delivery by practitioners with and without additional support needs’ address inclusion more directly – the former through a study of the experiences of those with cochlear implants, the latter by interrogating the possibilities of including those with additional support needs as leaders, not just as followers. Finally, Karl Gunther’s article considers the historical practice of auditions for community choirs.

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.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.302 · 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