Danze senza peso : ipotesi su Maud Allan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il saggio rilancia l’efficacia generativa, assolutamente esemplare e atipica, della formazione musicale della danzatrice canadese Maud Allan. Anche se fu incapace di elaborare un proprio metodo, o di tradurre in sistema quanto aveva sperimentato, ciò che il saggio indaga è la sua inassimilabilità a esperienze coeve di interpreti barefoot, quali Isadora Duncan, Ruth St. Denis e Loïe Fuller. Il precoce talento musicale, la formazione pianistica completata con Ferruccio Busoni e, in termini performativi, la predilezione per la dimensione solista e concertistica, nondimeno infine il suo essere donna lesbica negli anni Venti del Novecento, esemplificano il suo approdo alla danza libera come logica conseguenza dell’avversione per ogni metodo e l’applicazione radicale del “metodo naturale” proposto dal pianista e didatta Rudolf M. Breithaupt, uno dei più significativi teorici della “tecnica del peso”, del quale Busoni diffuse i fondamenti.----The essay revives the fruitful and atypical musical education of a Canadian dancer, Maud Allan. Even if she belonged to the generation of “barefoot dancers”, like Isadora Duncan, Ruth St. Denis and Loïe Fuller, she was never considered one of them and was unable to elaborate her own method, or to transmute what she had experimented into a system. Her precocious musical talent, her piano training with Ferruccio Busoni and her performative predilection for the solo and concert dimension, as well as her being a lesbian in the 1920s, exemplify her move towards a free dance. This came as a logical consequence of her aversion to any method and her radical application of the “natural method” proposed by the pianist and teacher Rudolf M. Breithaupt, one of the most significant theorists of the “weight technique”, that was also propagated by Busoni.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".