MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413252945 · doi:10.21810/aer.v11i1.6127

The Soundscape of Burning Man

2023· article· en· W4413252945 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stephan Moore, Scott Smallwood

Bibliographic record

VenueAcoustic Ecology Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of AlbertaBrown University
KeywordsSoundscapeThrivingWitnessDesert (philosophy)HistoryPopulationEphemeral keyMultitudeEvent (particle physics)Sound (geography)Visual artsAestheticsGeographyArchaeologyArtSociologyPolitical scienceLawGeologySocial scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Burning Man Festival, an annual art festival in the Nevada Black Rock Desert of the Western US, has been going strongly for over 20 years, and has grown immensely since its humble beginnings in 1986. In the last few years, the event has reached a population of well over 50,000 people, featuring hundreds of performances, and thousands of works of art in all media and on all scales imaginable. A party in the desert for some, a way of life for others, the festival and the temporary city that supports it is a remarkable human enterprise, thriving on communal effort and participation, a gifting economy, radical self-reliance, and radical self-expression. The unique soundscape of Black Rock City, Burning Man’s ephemeral home, with its multitude of sonic art works, musical performances and immersive environments, offers some of the most unusual and interesting sonic experiences for the week that it exists. This study looks at the evolution of this unique soundscape through the course of the event, from its beginning as an uninhabited desert, to the gradual construction of the city by the inhabitants, to the height of its celebratory completion as the tenth largest city in the state of Nevada, its ultimate destruction with the burning of the central art structures, and the leave-no-trace cleanup process that follows. Throughout the event, we witness a ritualistic ebb and flow of sound as the citizens of the city celebrate radical self-expression in remarkable ways: hot days of construction and exploration, the city-wide celebration of sunset, the festive all-night dancing, the exhausted and restful morning, the exuberant burning of the man, and the contemplative and quiet burning of the temple. Our study analyzes the soundscape across the vast space of the event, looking at its daily and week-long evolution, through field recordings, discussions with participants, and personal observations. The paper is derived from observations over the previous eight years of the event, as well as a sound journal based on Burning Man 2011.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.396 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcoustic Ecology ReviewSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207