MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7004958783

A Particle Filter for Predicting an Orchestral Conductor's Baton Movements.

2013· article· en· W7004958783 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesCanada Council for the ArtsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and TechnologyMcGill University
KeywordsFilter (signal processing)Particle filterParticle (ecology)Noise (video)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Telematic musical performance, in which performers at two or more sites collaborate via networked audio and video, suffers significantly from latency.In the extreme case, performers at all sites slow to match their delayed counterparts, resulting in a steadily decreasing tempo.Introducing video of a conductor does not immediately solve the problem, as conductor video is also subjected to network latencies.This article lays the groundwork for an alternative approach to mitigating the effects of latency in distributed orchestral performances, based on generation of a predicted version of the conductor's baton trajectory.The prediction step is the most fundamental problem in this scheme, for which we propose the use of conventional machine learning techniques.Specifically, we demonstrate a particle filter and an extended Kalman filter that each track the location of the baton's tip and predict it multiple beats into the future; we compare these with a conventional feature-based method.We also describe a generic two-part framework that prescribes the incorporation of rehearsal data into a probabilistic model, which is then adapted during live performance.Finally, we suggest a framework and experimental methodology for establishing perceptually based metrics for predicted baton paths.Note that the perceptual efficacy of the presented methods requires experimental confirmation beyond the scope of this article.

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)0.002
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicAmphibian and Reptile Biology→French-language works237,207→