Linking melodic expectation to expressive performance timing and perceived musical tension.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explored the relations between the predictability of musical structure, expressive timing in performance, and listeners' perceived musical tension. Studies analyzing the influence of expressive timing on listeners' affective responses have been constrained by the fact that, in most pieces, the notated durations limit performers' interpretive freedom. To circumvent this issue, we focused on the unmeasured prelude, a semi-improvisatory genre without notated durations. In Experiment 1, 12 professional harpsichordists recorded an unmeasured prelude on a harpsichord equipped with a MIDI console. Melodic expectation was assessed using a probabilistic model (IDyOM [Information Dynamics of Music]) whose expectations have been previously shown to match closely those of human listeners. Performance timing information was extracted from the MIDI data using a score-performance matching algorithm. Time-series analyses showed that, in a piece with unspecified note durations, the predictability of melodic structure measurably influenced tempo fluctuations in performance. In Experiment 2, another 10 harpsichordists, 20 nonharpsichordist musicians, and 20 nonmusicians listened to the recordings from Experiment 1 and rated the perceived tension continuously. Granger causality analyses were conducted to investigate predictive relations among melodic expectation, expressive timing, and perceived tension. Although melodic expectation, as modeled by IDyOM, modestly predicted perceived tension for all participant groups, neither of its components, information content or entropy, was Granger causal. In contrast, expressive timing was a strong predictor and was Granger causal. However, because melodic expectation was also predictive of expressive timing, our results outline a complete chain of influence from predictability of melodic structure via expressive performance timing to perceived musical tension. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".