Gaining Insights into Signed Music Through Performers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Signed music is best described as an inter-performative art form that combines lyrical and non-lyrical musical performances and is deeply rooted in the culture of deaf people who communicate through signed language (J. H. Cripps & Lyonblum, 2017; J. H. Cripps et al., in press [a]). The key investigative component for this article includes outlining the experiences that three Canadian performers had about their signed music creativity during a plenary at the Partition/Ensemble 2020 Conference held by the Canadian Association for Theatre Research in Montreal, Quebec. The panelists responded to two questions that they developed for themselves: What inspired us to become musicians? How did the creative process of composing the signed music piece occur from the beginning to the end? The paper also covers an open discussion that the three performers had among themselves. Some signed music work examples are provided for viewing to support the premise that deaf people have full capacity for the creation and enjoyment of music. The paper represents a departure from the long-held view that music can only prevail in the audible form. The insights gained from the three deaf performers are the first of their kind and will contribute to the musical world.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.100 | 0.002 |
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 it