MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7056529751

Governing the Moscow Conservatory, 1889-1905

2021· dissertation· en· W7056529751 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicThermal properties of materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of OxfordSchulich School of MusicMcGill UniversityUniversity of Rochester
KeywordsModernization theoryCharterPoliticsDictatorshipPower (physics)St petersburg
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the genesis of power in music institutions is pivotal for understanding their further evolution.This study of the management practices in the fin-de-sicle Moscow Conservatory analyzes explosive institutional politics that brought about its modernization under the directorship of Vasily Safonov (1852-1918).He tried to replace the collegial management style of his predecessors with a one-man dictatorship in the Conservatory by using and manipulating his powerful connections in the upper classes, silencing opponents within the Conservatory walls, and attempting to change its charter.Applying political and social science methods and the tools of institutional analysis, the paper examines primary sources, charter drafts, memoirs, diaries, and correspondence and argues that the governing system Safonov established at the Moscow Conservatory was neither a collegiate, nor an authoritarian, but a hybrid regime.The support for this statement comes from a comparative analysis of managerial practices at the Moscow and St. Petersburg Conservatories as seen in their respective reactions to the 1905 Russian revolution.This thesis contributes fresh angles to recent studies on the Moscow Conservatory's development, hierarchy in music education, and the nineteenth century European conservatories' structure.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.007

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.215 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicThermal properties of materialsFrench-language works237,207