MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2603442026 · doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.109

Isolated guitar transcription using a deep belief network

2017· article· en· W2603442026 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory Burlet, Abram Hindle

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ Computer Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuitarTranscription (linguistics)Computer sciencePolyphonySpeech recognitionMusical notationDeep learningNotationAudio signalArtificial intelligenceSpeech codingAcousticsMathematicsArithmeticMusical

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Music transcription involves the transformation of an audio recording to common music notation, colloquially referred to as sheet music. Manually transcribing audio recordings is a difficult and time-consuming process, even for experienced musicians. In response, several algorithms have been proposed to automatically analyze and transcribe the notes sounding in an audio recording; however, these algorithms are often general-purpose, attempting to process any number of instruments producing any number of notes sounding simultaneously. This paper presents a polyphonic transcription algorithm that is constrained to processing the audio output of a single instrument, specifically an acoustic guitar. The transcription system consists of a novel note pitch estimation algorithm that uses a deep belief network and multi-label learning techniques to generate multiple pitch estimates for each analysis frame of the input audio signal. Using a compiled dataset of synthesized guitar recordings for evaluation, the algorithm described in this work results in an 11% increase in the f-measure of note transcriptions relative to Zhou et al.’s (2009) transcription algorithm in the literature. This paper demonstrates the effectiveness of deep, multi-label learning for the task of polyphonic transcription.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJ Computer ScienceSame topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207