Abstract
Classification in music analysis involves the segmentation of a musicpiece and the categorisation of the segments depending onsimilarity-based criteria. In this paper we investigate, based on aformal approach, how variations in the representation of the musicalsegments and in the categorisation algorithm influence the outcome ofthe classification. More specifically, we vary the choice of featuresdescribing each segment, the way these features are represented, andthe categorisation algorithm. At the same time, we keep the otherparameters, that is the overall model architecture, the music pieces,and the segmentation, fixed. We show that the choice andrepresentation of the features, but not the specific categorisationalgorithm, have a strong impact on the obtained analysis. Weintroduce a distance function to compare the results of algorithmicand human classification, and we show that an appropriate choice offeatures can yield results that are very similar to a humanclassification. These results allow an objective evaluation ofdifferent approaches to music classification in a uniform setting.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anagnostopoulou, C. and G. Westermann. “Classification in Music: A Formal Model for Paradigmatic Analysis.” Proceedings of the ICMC, (1997).
Cambouropoulos, E. and A. Smaill. “Similarity and Categorisation Inextricably Bound Together: The Unscramble Machine Learning Algorithm.” Proceedings of the Interdisciplinary Workshop on Similarity and Categorisation, (1997).
Duda, R. and P. Hart. Pattern Classification and Scene Analysis. Wiley-Interscience, 1973.
Fritzke B. “A Growing Neural Gas Algorithm Learns Topologies.” In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 7. Eds. G. Tesauro, D. S. Touretzky and T. K. Lean, MIT Press, 1995.
Gjerdingen, R. “Categorization of Musical Patterns by Self-Organising Neuronlike Networks.” Music Perception, 7(4) (1990).
Gusfield, D. “Algorithms on Strings, Trees, and Sequences.” In Computer Science and Computational Biology, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Hörnel, D. “A Multi-scale Neural-Network Model for Learning and Reproducing Chorale Variations.” Melodic Similarity – Concepts, Procedures, and Applications. Computing in Musicology, 11 (1998).
Kohonen, T. “The Self-Organising Map.” Proceedings of the IEEE, 78(9) (1990).
Nattiez, J. “Fondements d'une Sémiologie de la Musique.” Union Générale d'Editions, 1975.
Rolland, P. “FlExPat: A Novel Algorithm For Musical Pattern Discovery.” In Proceedings of the XII Colloquium on Musical Informatics, AIMI Association, 1998.
Ruwet, N. “Méthodes D'Analyse en Musicologie.” Revue Belge de Musicologie, 20 (1966).
Stammen, D. and B. Pennycook. “Real-time Recognition of Melodic Fragments Using the Dynamic Timewarp Algorithm.” In Proceedings of the ICMC, 1993.
Ward, J. “Hierarchical Grouping to Optimize an Objective Function.” Journal of American Statistical Association, 58 (1963).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Höthker, K., Hörnel, D. & Anagnostopoulou, C. Investigating the Influence of Representations and Algorithms in Music Classification. Computers and the Humanities 35, 65–79 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002787826686
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002787826686