MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909242004 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02725

Kinematic Analysis of Pianists' Expressive Performances of Romantic Excerpts: Applications for Enhanced Pedagogical Approaches

2019· article· en· W2909242004 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic Technology and Sound Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and TechnologyMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyPianoMotion captureMotion (physics)MusicalExpression (computer science)Cognitive psychologyDynamics (music)RomanceDuration (music)Movement (music)Musical formMusical instrumentPerforming artsKinematicsComputer scienceAestheticsAcousticsArtVisual artsArtificial intelligenceLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Established pedagogical theories for classical piano usually do not consider the essential relationship between the musical structure, whole body movements, and expression. Research focusing on musicians' expression has shown that body movements reflect the performer's understanding of the musical structure. However, most studies to date focus on the performance of a single piece at a time, leaving unanswered the question on how structural parameters of pieces with varied technical difficulties influence pianists' movements. In this study, 10 pianists performed three contrasting Romantic excerpts in terms of technical level and character, while motion data was collected with a passive infrared motion capture system. We observed how pianists modulate their performances for each of the three pieces and measured the absolute difference in percentage of duration and quantity of motion (QoM) between four expressive conditions (normal, deadpan, exaggerated, immobile). We analyzed common patterns within the time-series of position data to investigate whether pianists embody musical structure in similar ways. A survey was filled in by pianists to understand how they conceive the relationship between body movements and musical structure. Results show that the variation in duration between the exaggerated and deadpan conditions was significant in one measure for one of the excerpts, and that tempo was less affected by the QoM used than by the level of expression. By applying PCA on the pianists' position data, we found that the head QoM is an important parameter for communicating different expressions and structural features. Significant variations in head QoM were found in the immobile and deadpan conditions if compared to the normal condition, only in specific regions of the score. Recurrent head movements occurred along with certain structural parameters for two of the excerpts only. Altogether, these results indicate that the analysis of pianists' body movements and expressive intentions should be carried out in relation to the specific musical context, being dependent on the technical level of the pieces and the repertoire. These results, combined with piano teaching methods, may lead to the development of new approaches in instrumental lessons to help students make independent choices regarding body movements and expression.

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.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.275 · 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