MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312350325 · doi:10.1121/10.0016072

Estimating steelpan note class from attack transients

2022· article· en· W4312350325 on OpenAlexaff
Colin Malloy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTonalitySpeech recognitionIntonation (linguistics)Latency (audio)Transient (computer programming)SIGNAL (programming language)AcousticsAudio analyzerTask (project management)Audio signalAudio signal processingTelecommunicationsSpeech codingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The estimation of fundamental frequency of instruments is an important task in computational audio analysis. The current state of the art methods use neural networks for this task. This process is typically computed periodically over very short segments of a monophonic audio signal so that minute shifts in intonation can be detected. However, the steelpan has discretely tuned notes where the performer has no direct control over pitch once a note has been activated. The activation of a note has great influence over the acoustical properties of the resultant note. Much research has been devoted to the tonality, construction, and acoustical properties of steelpans, but relatively little focuses on the attack transient specifically.This paper evaluates the application of pitch detection methods to the attack transients of steelpan notes. A dataset containing labeled audio samples from multiple tenor steelpans is used for training and evaluation. The accuracy of this approach for pitch detection is compared with established methods applied to both entire notes and only attack transients. Determining a steelpan note’s pitch from the attack transient is an important first step in building a robust low latency automatic transcription system that can be used for both analysis as well as live performance.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207