MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409605111 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-306

Analysis and Enhancement Strategies of Emotional Expression Based on Pattern Recognition in Vocal Performance

2025· article· en· W4409605111 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Culture and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeech recognitionEmotional expressionExpression (computer science)Computer sciencePsychologyPattern recognition (psychology)CommunicationArtificial intelligenceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The essence of music is the carrier of human emotion expression, with the continuous deepening of music science and technology research, how to realize more accurate music emotion recognition has become the focus of public attention.This paper constructs a music emotion recognition model based on discrete emotion space (WLDNN_SAGAN).After pre-processing the collected audio data of vocal performances, the attention mechanism is introduced to weight and fuse the extracted low-level and middle-high-level music emotion features, and then the fused feature information is inputted into the WLDNN_SAGAN network to classify music emotions.The experimental results show that the model in this paper will improve the recognition accuracy of different emotions.Compared with the comparison model, the accuracy of this paper's model reaches 60% and above on three DIFFERENT datasets.The emotional vein of Chinese folk song performance identified by the model is lightness towards sadness and sacredness, which is consistent with the historical facts of Chinese folk song creation.In conclusion, the emotional expression of vocal performance can be enhanced by understanding the cultural connotation, applying singing techniques and body language.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.288
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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicAsian Culture and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207