MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7011008089

Les collections d'instruments de musique. 1ère partie.: Musique-Images-Instruments. Revue française d'organologie et d'iconographie musicale. Volume 8.

2006· book· fr· W7011008089 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2006
Typebook
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe RenaissanceContext (archaeology)Middle AgesNova scotia
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deux volumes de Musique-Images-Instruments portent sur l'Histoire des collections d'instruments de musique de la Renaissance au XXe siècle. Cette thématique est consacrée aux collections disparues ou faisant partie aujourd'hui d'ensembles appartenant à des particuliers ou à des institutions. Elle traite aussi bien des cabinets de curiosité, des collections d'étude, d'instrumentarium liés à la pratique, que de laboratoires d'expérimentation ou de collections de voyageurs. Soulignant des aspects aussi variés que l'histoire du goût, le mécénat, l'histoire institutionnelle, le contexte culturel et les enjeux symboliques, ces études dessinent une anthropologie historique des collections et soulignent l'évolution de la notion de patrimoine. Ce volume 8, consacré aux collections des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles, constitue la première partie de cette histoire des collections. Eszter Fontana, Musical Instruments for the Electoral Kunstkammer in Dresden around 1600 ; Florence Gétreau, Quelques cabinets d'instruments en France au temps des rois Bourbons ; Thomas Vernet, Les collections musicales des princes de Conti ; François Picard, Joseph-Marie Amiot, jésuite français à Pékin, et le cabinet de curiosités de Bertin ; Cristina Ghirardini, Les instruments chinois dans le 'Gabinetto Armonico' (1723) de Filippo Bonnani ; Caroline Giron, Une colleciton perdue : les instruments de l'ospedale des Mendicanti, à Venise ; Nicole Lallement, Inventaire des tableaux à sujets musicaux du musée du Louvre (VI) : suite et fin.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.011

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)→Same topicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies→French-language works237,207→