Representation of Quarter Life Crisis as a Communication Message in the Song Lyric of 'Quarter Life' by Tomorrow X Together (TXT)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Music is used as a means of expressing emotions that occur when happy or sad, including mental health problems, one of which is quarter life crisis. This article will discuss song lyrics that describe the quarter life crisis phase experienced from the age of 20 to 25 years. This research aims to analyze the representation of quarter life crisis as a communication message in the lyrics of the song ―Quarter Life‖ by Tomorrow X Together (TXT). The method used is interpretive qualitative analysis and the technique of collecting data for this research is by using document studies, this research will represent the text of the song lyrics using Roland Barthes' semiotic theory. This semiotic theory will analyze the denotation, connotation and myth contained in the song lyrics. The results of the semiotic analysis in the lyrics of ―Quarter Life‖ are as follows, the denotation meaning of this research is that the author wants to explain how to feel when experiencing the quarter life crisis phase. The connotation meaning contained in the song lyrics, the author wants this writer to describe his feelings with dissatisfaction and unhappiness that he has experienced. The mythical meaning is that the author wants to explain personal feelings indirectly by using the song lyrics to the listener. In conclusion, the message of the lyrics of ―Quarter Life‖ by TXT has a meaning in the 2 form of the feelings of someone who is experiencing a quarter life crisis phase such as uncertainty, identity search, fear of failure and search for the meaning of life contained in the lyrics of this song.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".