A sensory-friendly adaptive concert model supported by caregiver perspectives
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attending a concert may prove difficult for individuals with exceptionalities or disabilities and those who support them. While traditional performance environments may not feel welcoming or amenable for individuals with exceptionalities and their families, arts organizations have recently made efforts to produce concerts that address barriers to accessibility. These adaptive concerts, most frequently labeled as Sensory-Friendly Concerts, attempt to create environments suitable for diverse communities, supporting individuals and groups who are frequently underrepresented as audience members in performance contexts. This article explores adaptive music performances, contributing a model for sensory-friendly adaptive concerts supported by caregivers’ perspectives through a post-concert survey. The model proposed includes four areas of adaptation: pre-show work, environment audit, extra-musical aids, and programming adjustments. The authors outline the various modifications with data points from a sample of adaptive concert caregiver attendees ( n = 15), aligning the theoretical model with practice to provide practical examples and tangible outputs for researchers, presenters, musicians, educators, and policymakers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it