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 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.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
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

Quick stats

Citations56
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207