MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predicting song popularity in the digital age through Spotify’s data

2024· article· en· W4399893237 on OpenAlexaff
K. Li

Bibliographic record

VenueTheoretical and Natural Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityComputer scienceHomoscedasticityDuration (music)MusicalPopular musicRobustness (evolution)AdvertisingHeteroscedasticityPsychologyMachine learningSocial psychologyArtBusinessVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study delves into predicting song popularity on Spotify by analyzing a dataset of song features from 1986 to 2022. Using linear regression, this paper examines the influence of audio characteristics such as energy, danceability, speechiness, duration, and mode, alongside the year of release. The findings indicate that danceability, more recent release years, and longer track duration are positively associated with higher popularity levels. Conversely, songs in minor keys are more favored than those in major keys. These results highlight the significance of both intrinsic musical qualities and evolving listener preferences over time. The model's robustness is ensured through comprehensive diagnostic tests that validate the assumptions of linearity, normality, and homoscedasticity, confirming the predictive reliability of the identified factors. This research not only enhances the understanding of the dynamics driving music popularity but also provides valuable insights for artists and producers aiming to optimize their music for digital platforms. By focusing on the critical elements that resonate with contemporary audiences, stakeholders can better strategize their music releases to maximize listener engagement and success on streaming platforms.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheoretical and Natural ScienceSame topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207