MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7143847478 · doi:10.18953/0002000012

ニッポノホン『紙治』―三代竹本津太夫と六代鶴沢友次郎による演奏記録―

2023· article· ja· W7143847478 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
飯島満

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJapanese History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Historical recordQuarter (Canadian coin)Window (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 78 RPM three-disc record “Kami-Ji” released in 1922 or 1923 is a recording of “Kawasho” performed by TAKEMOTO Tsudayu III (1869-1941), a narrator of gidayu-bushi joruri, and TSURUZAWA Tomojiro VI (1874-1951), a shamisen-player of gidayu-bushi joruri. It is said to be one of their best recordings. “Kawasho (the Kawasho Teahouse)” is the first scene of “Shinju Ten no Amijima (The Love Suicides at Amijima),” written by CHIKAMATSU Monzaemon and premiered in 1720. In the record, Tsudayu III and Tomojiro VI play about a quarter of the second half of “Kawasho” (about 18 minutes of recording time). The title of the record comes from the main character, Kamiya Jihei. The current version of “Kawasho” is based on a libretto partially adapted by CHIKAMATSU Hanji in 1778. However, since it is said that Tsudayu III and Tomojiro VI performed “Kawasho” using the original script by CHIKAMATSU Monzaemon in 1917 rather than the adaptation script that was already common at that time, the record is likely a reproduction of their 1917 version. Today, there is no one to perform the original libretto “Kawasho” anymore. Nor has sufficient research been conducted of the 1917 version. This record is not only excellent in terms of performance content, but it is also valuable as a recorded material.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.022

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicJapanese History and CultureFrench-language works237,207