MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625913037 · doi:10.1121/1.4987762

Modal active control: A tool to finely adjust the sound of string instruments

2017· article· en· W2625913037 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Benacchio

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic Technology and Sound Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCelloModalString (physics)GuitarAcousticsComputer scienceMusical instrumentControl (management)Musical acousticsMusicalCoupling (piping)PhysicsEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringTheoretical physicsPianoMaterials scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Controlling the vibratory properties of musical instruments is an important challenge for musical acousticians, musicians, and instrument makers. The latter try to control these properties modifying mechanical parameters of instruments like their shape or their materials to obtain some expected sound attributes. Musicians also modify the vibratory properties of their instruments to change their sound using mutes, for example. Musical acousticians try to modify these properties because it is an intuitive way to investigate the relationship between the instrument mechanisms and their sound attributes. Inspired by industrial techniques, active control was revealed as a convenient way to answer to the latter goal. Moreover, modal active control is a preferred method for the application to musical instruments since their modal parameters are believed to be good descriptors of their vibratory properties. This study aims at applying modal active control on string instruments. First, the possibilities offered by this technique are presented and experimented on several instruments. Then, examples of the control of specific phenomena are given. Couplings between the soundboard and strings for both a cello and a guitar are controlled to cancel the well-known wolf-note phenomenon for the former and to switch from strong to weak coupling for the latter.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMusic Technology and Sound StudiesFrench-language works237,207