MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063111556 · doi:10.1121/1.4787140

Automatic detection of head voice in sung musical signals via machine learning classification of time-varying partial intensities

2006· article· en· W2063111556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ryan J. Cassidy, Gautham J. Mysore

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMel-frequency cepstrumSpeech recognitionSIGNAL (programming language)Support vector machineClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceFourier transformSignal processingAcousticsPattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionMathematicsTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The automatic detection of portions of a musical signal produced according to time-varying performance parameters is an important problem in musical signal processing. The present work attempts such a task: the algorithms presented seek to determine from a sung input signal which portions of the signal are sung using the head voice, also known as falsetto in the case of a male singer. In the authors’ prior work [Mysore et al., Asilomar Conf. Signal. Sys. Comp. (2006) (submitted)], a machine learning technique known as a support vector classifier [Boyd and Vandenberghe, 2004] was used to identify falsetto portions of a sung signal using the mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs) of that signal (computed at a frame rate of 50 Hz). In the present work, the time-varying amplitudes of the first four harmonics, relative to the intensity of the fundamental, and as estimated by the quadratically interpolated fast Fourier transform (QIFFT) [Abe and Smith, ICASSP 2005], are used as a basis for classification. Preliminary experiments show a successful classification rate of over 95% for the QIFFT-based technique, compared to approximately 90% success with the prior MFCC-based approach. [Ryan J. Cassidy supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207