MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404871380 · doi:10.4000/12sj3

Introduction: Exploring the Artistic Uses of Sonic Remnants

2024· article· en· W4404871380 on OpenAlex

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

VenueFiligrane · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Musicological Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeActive listeningUnsaidPower (physics)Collective memoryVisionSound (geography)HegemonyOrder (exchange)Visual artsAestheticsSociologyHistoryMedia studiesArtLiteraturePolitical scienceAnthropologyPoliticsCommunicationAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Archives are both spaces of power and sites of memory. For this reason, artistic practices exploring sound archives have the capacity to reshape our visions of the past and produce new knowledge. The articles in this Filigrane special issue explore the creative possibilities of sound archives. How do artists use sound archives to propose counter-hegemonic historical narratives? What are the creative processes involved in reusing such archives? How do artists and their works reactivate the voices of the past through listening, propose new narratives, explore what is said and unsaid in collective memory and official history, and make the struggles of the past resonate in order to understand those of the present?

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.050 · 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