613 research outputs found

    Spectators’ aesthetic experiences of sound and movement in dance performance

    Get PDF
    In this paper we present a study of spectators’ aesthetic experiences of sound and movement in live dance performance. A multidisciplinary team comprising a choreographer, neuroscientists and qualitative researchers investigated the effects of different sound scores on dance spectators. What would be the impact of auditory stimulation on kinesthetic experience and/or aesthetic appreciation of the dance? What would be the effect of removing music altogether, so that spectators watched dance while hearing only the performers’ breathing and footfalls? We investigated audience experience through qualitative research, using post-performance focus groups, while a separately conducted functional brain imaging (fMRI) study measured the synchrony in brain activity across spectators when they watched dance with sound or breathing only. When audiences watched dance accompanied by music the fMRI data revealed evidence of greater intersubject synchronisation in a brain region consistent with complex auditory processing. The audience research found that some spectators derived pleasure from finding convergences between two complex stimuli (dance and music). The removal of music and the resulting audibility of the performers’ breathing had a significant impact on spectators’ aesthetic experience. The fMRI analysis showed increased synchronisation among observers, suggesting greater influence of the body when interpreting the dance stimuli. The audience research found evidence of similar corporeally focused experience. The paper discusses possible connections between the findings of our different approaches, and considers the implications of this study for interdisciplinary research collaborations between arts and sciences

    LELIE - An Intelligent Assistant for Improving Requirement Authoring

    Get PDF
    International audienceWhen writing or revising a set of requirements, or any technical document, it is particularly challenging to make sure that texts read easily and are unambiguous for any domain actor. Experience shows that even with several levels of proofreading and validation, most texts still contain a large number of language errors (lexical, grammatical, style, business, w.r.t. authoring recommendations), and lack of overall cohesion and coherence. LELIE [a] has been designed to track these errors and, whenever possible, to suggest corrections. LELIE has obviously an impact on the technical writer behavior: LELIE rapidly becomes an essential and user-friendly authoring companion

    Research in the Language, Information and Computation Laboratory of the University of Pennsylvania

    Get PDF
    This report takes its name from the Computational Linguistics Feedback Forum (CLiFF), an informal discussion group for students and faculty. However the scope of the research covered in this report is broader than the title might suggest; this is the yearly report of the LINC Lab, the Language, Information and Computation Laboratory of the University of Pennsylvania. It may at first be hard to see the threads that bind together the work presented here, work by faculty, graduate students and postdocs in the Computer Science and Linguistics Departments, and the Institute for Research in Cognitive Science. It includes prototypical Natural Language fields such as: Combinatorial Categorial Grammars, Tree Adjoining Grammars, syntactic parsing and the syntax-semantics interface; but it extends to statistical methods, plan inference, instruction understanding, intonation, causal reasoning, free word order languages, geometric reasoning, medical informatics, connectionism, and language acquisition. Naturally, this introduction cannot spell out all the connections between these abstracts; we invite you to explore them on your own. In fact, with this issue it’s easier than ever to do so: this document is accessible on the “information superhighway”. Just call up http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~cliff-group/94/cliffnotes.html In addition, you can find many of the papers referenced in the CLiFF Notes on the net. Most can be obtained by following links from the authors’ abstracts in the web version of this report. The abstracts describe the researchers’ many areas of investigation, explain their shared concerns, and present some interesting work in Cognitive Science. We hope its new online format makes the CLiFF Notes a more useful and interesting guide to Computational Linguistics activity at Penn
    • …
    corecore