MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7038527240

Interpreting Jean Coulthard's Concerto for Piano and Orchestra (1963): A Pianist's Perspective

2022· dissertation· en· W7038527240 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCUNY Academic Works (City University of New York) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBryophyte Studies and Records
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcertoPianoSymphonyScrutinyPerspective (graphical)MusicalNotationSonata formCadenza
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jean Coulthard (1908-2000) is recognized as one of Canada’s most prolific and important female classical composers in the twentieth century. She remained creatively active from her hometown of Vancouver, British Columbia, for eight decades, resulting in a catalog of over 350 works representing most classical music genres. Her music continues to be performed and recorded by renowned ensembles and soloists such as the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra, CBC Vancouver Orchestra, Calgary Philharmonic, Purcell String Quartet, pianists John Ogdon and Jane Coop, and contralto Maureen Forrester. Coulthard is known for her distinctive coloristic sonorities reminiscent of those in works by European composers such as Rachmaninoff, Debussy, Ravel, and Scriabin, but unique through her use of extended chords based on triadic harmony, fleeting tonal centers, and juxtaposition of major and minor modalities. Coulthard’s Piano Concerto (1963) is an audience-accessible work that represents a confluence of traditional forms and twentieth-century approaches to melody and harmony. However, the piece has not yet been placed under considerable analytical scrutiny and has not been performed since 1980. This essay seeks to introduce Coulthard’s life and work to a wider audience and make a case for why the Concerto deserves to be revived and considered a serious concert work.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCUNY Academic Works (City University of New York)Same topicBryophyte Studies and RecordsFrench-language works237,207