MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396777117 · doi:10.1017/9781805432920.006

1863: Studies with Lemmens and Fétis

2024· other· en· W4396777117 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John R. Near

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetisComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When my studies were completed, my father, who was a very close friend of Aristide Cavaillé-Coll, decided, on his advice, to send me to Brussels to perfect my music studies with two illustrious masters of whom he was the friend: one, Jacques Lemmens, professor of organ; the other, François-Joseph Fétis, professor of composition and director of the [Brussels] Conservatory. I was to stay for a year in Brussels, from 1862 to 1863. This year of study decided my career. After teaching composition at the Paris Conservatory, Fétis was called to become director of the new Brussels Conservatory. He was a first-class musicologist and also a contributor to the Gazette musicale . All musicians know his remarkable Dictionnaire des musiciens . From the teaching at his Conservatory, you can judge his authority and the reputation that he made for this outstanding establishment. Subjected to the strict discipline of Fétis and Lemmens, my every moment was devoted to work. Every morning, Fétis gave me a fugue subject that I had to work on during the day and take back to him the next morning. Since I practiced the organ all day, I spent two or three hours in the evening writing my daily four-part fugue. I didn't try to be original, but my fugue had to be impeccably correct. The next morning at seven o’clock I would knock on Fétis's door, and he would correct my work. When the students of the Conservatory arrived in their turn around eight o’clock, the maître would read it to them, commenting on it. As for myself, I was a private pupil of Fétis, as were two other young men, one of whom was a very gifted Alsatian named Sieg, who died prematurely. I had little time left for recreation. Only on Sundays did I join a small club of musicians at a town pub, where I had been introduced by Alphonse Mailly, a pupil of Lemmens. There, I met a nursery of remarkable violinists in Brussels at the time, notably Henri Vieuxtemps, Hubert Léonard, César Thomson, and the young Eugène Ysaÿe. In Brussels, I also knew Charles-Auguste de Bériot, who had married Maria Malibran; her sister Pauline Viardot inspired Camille Saint-Saëns. I also knew Peter Benoit, director of the Antwerp Conservatory, who later came to perform his oratorio with organ and orchestra at the Trocadéro.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0250.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistorical and Literary Studies→French-language works237,207→