MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312533709 · doi:10.1609/aiide.v9i5.12654

Automatic Harmonization Using a Hidden Semi-Markov Model

2013· article· en· W4312533709 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Groves

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHidden Markov modelArtificial intelligenceMachine learningRealmProbabilistic logicHarmonizationTask (project management)Natural language processingMarkov modelMarkov chainEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hidden Markov Models have been used frequently in the audio domain to identify underlying musical structure. Much less work has been done in the purely symbolic realm. Recently, a substantial amount of expert-labelled symbolic musical data has been injected into the research community. The new availability of data allows for the application of machine learning models to purely symbolic tasks. Similarly, the continued expansion of the field of machine learning provides new perspectives and implementations of machine learning methods, which are powerful tools when approaching complex musical challenges. This research explores the use of an extended probabilistic model such as the Hidden Semi-Markov Model (HSMM) to approach the task of automatic harmonization. One distinct advantage of the HSMM is that it is able to automatically differentiate harmonic boundaries, through its inclusion of an extra parameter: duration. In this way, a melody can be harmonized automatically in the style of a particular corpus. In the case of this research, the corpus was in the style of Rock 'n' Roll.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0010.003
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital EntertainmentSame topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207