MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977423666 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2019.8851988

Music Artist Classification with Convolutional Recurrent Neural Networks

2019· preprint· en· W2977423666 on OpenAlexaff
Zain Nasrullah, Yue Zhao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSpectrogramConvolutional neural networkFeature extractionRecurrent neural networkBottleneckSet (abstract data type)Feature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionRepresentation (politics)Baseline (sea)Music information retrievalFrame (networking)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous attempts at music artist classification use frame level audio features which summarize frequency content within short intervals of time. Comparatively, more recent music information retrieval tasks take advantage of temporal structure in audio spectrograms using deep convolutional and recurrent models. This paper revisits artist classification with this new framework and empirically explores the impacts of incorporating temporal structure in the feature representation. To this end, an established classification architecture, a Convolutional Recurrent Neural Network (CRNN), is applied to the artist20 music artist identification dataset under a comprehensive set of conditions. These include audio clip length, which is a novel contribution in this work, and previously identified considerations such as dataset split and feature level. Our results improve upon baseline works, verify the influence of the producer effect on classification performance and demonstrate the trade-offs between audio length and training set size. The best performing model achieves an average F1 score of 0.937 across three independent trials which is a substantial improvement over the corresponding baseline under similar conditions. Additionally, to showcase the effectiveness of the CRNN's feature extraction capabilities, we visualize audio samples at the model's bottleneck layer demonstrating that learned representations segment into clusters belonging to their respective artists.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations56
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207