MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417286734 · doi:10.4324/9781003504283-15

Between Music and Architecture

2025· book-chapter· en· W4417286734 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Federica Goffi, Isabel Potworowski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureMusicalRepresentation (politics)Intersection (aeronautics)PianoStyle (visual arts)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian artist, composer, and musician Jesse Stewart examines the implications of the famous dictum, “Music is liquid architecture; Architecture is frozen music.” How do—or might—the fields of music and architecture illuminate one another? What is gained when we bring insights, approaches, and methodologies associated with architecture to bear on music creation and vice versa? This chapter explores these questions through an examination of several points of intersection intersections between music and architecture, including the work of composer architect Iannis Xenakis (1922–2001); contemporary architects Santiago Calatrava and Steven Holl; three of Stewart’s mentors: composer and music theorist James Tenney (1934–2006), composer and accordionist Pauline Oliveros (1932–2016), and composer and baritone saxophonist David Mott; as well as Stewart’s own interdisciplinary creative practice. In the second part of this text, Stewart engages in a dialogue with Federica Goffi and Isabel Potworowski. Together, they instructed an (un)common workshop on music and architecture at Carleton University in which first-year architecture students created ambiguous representations that can be described as drawing-scores. Such pieces lean towards the abstract nature of musical graphic scores while maintaining spatial elements, such as conventional architectural representation including plans or sections.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

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)0.0330.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtistic and Creative ResearchFrench-language works237,207