MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157880479 · doi:10.1145/2576768.2598303

Automatic design of sound synthesizers as pure data patches using coevolutionary mixed-typed cartesian genetic programming

2014· article· en· W2157880479 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthieu Macret, Philippe Pasquier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Council for the Arts
KeywordsComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Mel-frequency cepstrumGenetic algorithmPopulationCepstrumFitness functionGenetic programmingNoise (video)Speech recognitionArtificial intelligenceProgramming languageMachine learningFeature extraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sound synthesizer can be defined as a program that takes a few input parameters and returns a sound. The general sound synthesis problem could then be formulated as: given a sound (or a set of sounds) what program and set of input parameters can generate that sound (set of sounds)? We propose a novel approach to tackle this problem in which we represent sound synthesizers using Pure Data (Pd), a graphic programming language for digital signal processing. We search the space of possible sound synthesizers using Coevolutionary Mixed-typed Cartesian Genetic Programming (MT-CGP), and the set of input parameters using a standard Genetic Algorithm (GA). The proposed algorithm co-evolves a population of MT-CGP graphs, representing the functional forms of synthesizers, and a population of GA chromosomes, representing their inputs parameters. A fitness function based on the Mel-frequency Cepstral Coefficients (MFCC) evaluates the distance between the target and produced sounds. Our approach is capable of suggesting novel functional forms and input parameters, suitable to approximate a given target sound (and we hope in future iterations a set of sounds). Since the resulting synthesizers are presented as Pd patches, the user can experiment, interact with, and reuse them.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolutionary Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207