Machine recognition of timbre using steady-state tone of acoustic musical instruments

International Computer Music Conference, ICMC Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 1998, Pages

  Fujinaga, Ichiro ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); GENETIC ALGORITHMS; HIGHER ORDER STATISTICS; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MUSIC; NEAREST NEIGHBOR SEARCH;

EXEMPLAR BASED LEARNING; K-NEAREST NEIGHBORS CLASSIFIERS; MACHINE RECOGNITION; OPTIMAL SETS; SHORT SAMPLE; SPECTRA'S; SPECTRAL DATA; STANDARD DEVIATION; STEADY STATE; STEADY-STATE PORTION;

MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS;

EID: 85159570327     PISSN: 22233881     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Aha, D. W. 1997. Lazy learning. Artificial Intelligence Review 11 (1–5): 7–10.
2. Berger, K. W. 1964. Some factors in the recognition of timbre. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 36 (10): 1888–91.
3. Cash, G. L., and M. Hatamian. 1987. Optical character recognition by the method of moments. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing 39 (3): 291–310.
4. Cost, S., and S. Salzberg. 1993. A weighted nearest neighbor algorithm for learning with symbolic features. Machine Learning 10: 57–78.
5. Cover, T., and P. Hart. 1967. Nearest neighbor pattern classification. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 13 (1): 21–7.
6. Cover, T. M., and J. M. Van Campenhout. 1977. On the possible orderings in the measurement selection problem. Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 7 (9): 657–61.
7. De Poli, G., and P. Prandoni. 1997. Sonological models for timbre characterization. Journal of New Music Research. 26 (2): 170–97.
8. Dubnov, S., N. Tishby, and D. Cohen. 1997. Polyspectra as measures of sound texture and timbre. Journal of New Music Research. 26 (4): 277–314.
9. Fujinaga, I. 1996. Exemplar-based learning in adaptive optical music recognition system. Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference. 55–6.
10. Fujinaga, I., B. Pennycook, and B. Alphonce. 1989. Computer recognition of musical notation. Proceedings to the First International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition. 87–90.
11. Grey, J. M. 1987. Timbre discrimination in musical patterns. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 64 (2): 467–72.
12. Holland, J. H. 1975. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Ann Arbor: U. of Michigan Press.
13. Kelly, J. D., and L. Davis. 1991. Hybridizing the genetic algorithm and the k nearest neighbors classification algorithm. Fourth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and their Applications. 377–83.
14. Kendall, R. A. 1986. The role of acoustic signal partitions in listener categorization of musical phrases. Music Perception. 4 (2): 185–214.
15. Kendall, R. A., and E. C. Carterette. 1996. Difference thresholds for timbre related to spectral centroid. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition. 91–5.
16. Medin, D. L., and M. M. Schaffer. 1978. Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review 85: 207–38.
17. Nosofsky, R. M. 1986. Attention, similarity, and the identification categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 115 (1): 39–57.
18. Nosofsky, R. M. 1984. Choice, similarity, and the context theory of classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 10 (1): 104–14.
19. Ru, P, and S. A. Shamma. 1997. Representation of musical timbre in the auditory cortex. Journal of New Music Research. 26 (2): 154–69.
20. Saldanha, E. L., and J. F. Corso. 1964. Timbre cues and the identification of musical instruments. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 36(11): 2021–6.
21. Sandell, G. J. 1994. SHARC timbre database. http://www.parmly.luc.edu/sharc.
22. Siedlecki, W. S., J. 1989. A note on genetic algorithms for large-scale feature selection. Pattern Recognition Letters 10 (5): 335–47.
23. Wettschereck, D., D. W. Aha, and T. Mohri. 1997. A review and empirical evaluation of feature weighting methods for a class of lazy learning algorithms. Artificial Intelligence Review 11 (1–5): 272–314.