MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409573352 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-038

Application of Artificial Intelligence-based Music Generation Technology in Popular Music Production

2025· article· en· W4409573352 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComputational and Text Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Popular musicComputer scienceMusic technologyMultimediaArtificial intelligenceArtVisual artsMusic education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial Intelligence has been applied in many aspects of life, however, AI algorithms have been less used in the field of music. In this paper, a multi-track based pop music generation model MuseGAN is proposed, due to its poor contextualization and excessive tempo jumps in generating pop music samples. In this paper, a new multi-track pop music generation model-Recurrent Feature Generation Adversarial Network RFGAN is proposed. the model addresses the temporal relevance of the music structure and the repetitive nature of the musical section, and proposes a temporal model that enhances the contextual relevance of the music samples in terms of the time series, and improves the generative model according to this temporal model by converting the unidirectional structure in the original model to a recurrent structure, adding the feature extractor to the previous level of training information, which is combined with arbitrary noise and passed to the next training. An average pooling layer is added at the end of the generative model as a solution to the situation where the model generates too much noise for pop music samples. The improved model is superior to the pre-improvement model in terms of stability, convergence speed, and overfitting in pop music generation. In the audience scoring experiment, 60% of the top 5 pop music scores were generated using the RFGAN model proposed in this paper, indicating that the pop music generated using the RFGAN model has reached a high level comparable to the level of artificial pop music composition.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicComputational and Text Analysis MethodsFrench-language works237,207