MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7161959296 · doi:10.82308/9979

L'identité culturelle dans «Montréal», d'Ariane Moffatt : une analyse musicale sémiologique

2008· dissertation· fr· W7161959296 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laurier-Cromp, Méliane, 1983-

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusicologyMusicalCultural exchangeExoticism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La chanson « Montréal », d'Ariane Moffatt, a remporté un vif succès durant l'été 2006. Ce mémoire examine les causes de cette popularité. Après une revue des diverses méthodes existantes en recherche en musique populaire, trois types d'analyse se succèdent. En premier lieu, l'étude présentée ici décrit la chanson de manière théorique; on y observe le fonctionnement de la voix, de la mélodie, de la métrique, de la basse, des phrases, de la tonalité, des accords et des instruments utilises, images par une transcription précise de l'enregistrement de la chanson. Puis, le présent travail étudie les codes musicaux qui se retrouvent dans «Montréal». Dans cette deuxième section, le message musical du morceau est analysé, en tenant compte du contexte socioculturel de l'été 2006, de l'histoire nationale et musicale qui a précédé la sortie de cette pièce et des paroles de la chanson. Finalement, cette étude investigue la composante identitaire de «Montréal» en examinant les croyances nationalistes des Québécois, la place de la chanson dans l'imaginaire collectif de ce peuple, et la tradition musicale populaire de la province.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLiterature, Musicology, and Cultural Analysis→French-language works237,207→