Probing neural mechanisms of music perception, cognition and performance using multivariate decoding

Recent neuroscience research has shown increasing use of multivariate decoding methods and machine learning. These methods, by uncovering the source and nature of informative variance in large data sets, invert the classical direction of inference that attempts to explain brain activity from mental state variables or stimulus features. However, these techniques are not yet commonly used among music researchers. In this position article, we introduce some key features of machine learning methods and review their use in the field of cognitive and behavioral neuroscience of music. We argue for the great potential of these methods in decoding multiple data types, specifically audio waveforms, electroen- cephalography, functional MRI, and motion capture data. By finding the most informative aspects of stimulus and performance data, hypotheses can be generated pertaining to how the brain processes incoming musical information and generates behavioral output, respectively. Importantly, these methods are also applicable to different neural and physiological data types such as magnetoencephalography, near-infrared spectroscopy, positron emission tomography, and electromyography.Keywords: machine learning, classification, music neuroscienceSupplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031014.suppMusic is acoustic information with complex temporal and spa- tial features. Research into perception and cognition of multifac- eted aspects of music aims to decode the information from neural signals elicited by listening to music. Music performance, on the other hand, entails the encoding of musical information to neural commands issued to the muscles. To understand the neural pro- cesses underlying music perception, cognition, and performance, therefore, researchers face issues of extracting meaningful infor- mation from extremely large data sets with regard to neural, physiological, and biomechanical signals. This is nontrivial in light of recent technological advances in data collection, which can lead to a potentially overwhelming amount of data. The supervised and unsupervised methods of machine learning are powerful tools for uncovering unseen patterns in these large data sets. In this way, not only can the means of specified conditions be compared, but data-driven methods are used to uncover sources of informative variance in the signals. Moreover, machine learning allows for quantitative evaluation of individual differences in music percep- tion and performance.In this article, we introduce key features of machine learning and highlight some examples of their use on a range of data types. After reviewing basic concepts and terminology, we discuss di- mensionality reduction and the impact of the choice of algorithm. We then turn to data types we judge to be most relevant to the neural processing of music. For an audio waveform, it is possible to elucidate the most perceptually informative part of the signal, by determining which aspects of the signal are most salient or useful to the brain in determining specific characteristics of the sound. In the same way, it is possible to uncover neural representations of musical attributes such as rhythm and harmony in a data-driven way by applying supervised and unsupervised learning to single- trial electroencephalography (EEG) or functional MRI (fMRI) data. Finally, machine learning methods are also useful in behav- ioral research, allowing characterization of fundamental patterns of movements that use a large number of joints and muscles during musical performance.MethodsAlthough we do not aim to give a complete overview of these methods here (for a detailed review of machine learning methods for brain imaging, see Lemm, Blankertz, Dickhaus, & Muller, 2011), we introduce a number of key aspects of machine learning as they pertain to music cognition research.Basic TerminologyMachine learning (or statistical learning) involves uncovering meaningful patterns in collections of observations, often with the goal of classifying, or categorizing, the observations in some way. …

[1]  Anssi Klapuri,et al.  Automatic Classification of Pitched Musical Instrument Sounds , 2006 .

[2]  John Shawe-Taylor,et al.  Using string kernels to identify famous performers from their playing style , 2004, Intell. Data Anal..

[3]  V. Menon,et al.  Decoding temporal structure in music and speech relies on shared brain resources but elicits different fine-scale spatial patterns. , 2011, Cerebral cortex.

[4]  Jason Farquhar,et al.  Name that tune: Decoding music from the listening brain , 2011, NeuroImage.

[5]  Clemens Brunner,et al.  Mu rhythm (de)synchronization and EEG single-trial classification of different motor imagery tasks , 2006, NeuroImage.

[6]  J. F. Soechting,et al.  Hand kinematics of piano playing. , 2011, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  Yuan-Pin Lin,et al.  EEG-Based Emotion Recognition in Music Listening , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[8]  Shinichi Furuya,et al.  Individual differences in the biomechanical effect of loudness and tempo on upper-limb movements during repetitive piano keystrokes. , 2012, Human movement science.

[9]  Carol L. Krumhansl,et al.  Plink: "Thin Slices" of Music , 2010 .

[10]  John-Dylan Haynes,et al.  Multivariate decoding and brain reading: Introduction to the special issue , 2011, NeuroImage.

[11]  A. Roepstorff,et al.  The two-brain approach: how can mutually interacting brains teach us something about social interaction? , 2012, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[12]  Richard Granger,et al.  Investigation of melodic contour processing in the brain using multivariate pattern-based fMRI , 2011, NeuroImage.

[13]  C. C. A. M. Gielen,et al.  Shared mechanisms in perception and imagery of auditory accents , 2011, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[14]  Yi-Hsuan Yang,et al.  Exploiting online music tags for music emotion classification , 2011, TOMCCAP.

[15]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  Detecting imagined music from EEG , 2008 .

[16]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  P300 brain computer interface: current challenges and emerging trends , 2012, Front. Neuroeng..

[17]  อนิรุธ สืบสิงห์,et al.  Data Mining Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques , 2014 .

[18]  Ethem Alpaydin,et al.  Introduction to machine learning , 2004, Adaptive computation and machine learning.

[19]  David D. Cox,et al.  Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) “brain reading”: detecting and classifying distributed patterns of fMRI activity in human visual cortex , 2003, NeuroImage.

[20]  R. Gentner,et al.  Encoding of Motor Skill in the Corticomuscular System of Musicians , 2010, Current Biology.

[21]  P Desain,et al.  Sequenced subjective accents for brain–computer interfaces , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[22]  Daniel T. Larose,et al.  Discovering Knowledge in Data: An Introduction to Data Mining , 2005 .

[23]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Introduction to machine learning for brain imaging , 2011, NeuroImage.

[24]  Efstathios Stamatatos,et al.  Automatic identification of music performers with learning ensembles , 2005, Artif. Intell..

[25]  Daniel P. W. Ellis,et al.  Signal Processing for Music Analysis , 2011, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing.

[26]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  The Elements of Statistical Learning , 2001 .

[27]  Caroline Palmer,et al.  Rate Effects on Timing, Key Velocity, and Finger Kinematics in Piano Performance , 2011, PloS one.

[28]  Elias Pampalk,et al.  Content-based organization and visualization of music archives , 2002, MULTIMEDIA '02.

[29]  Jyh-Horng Chen,et al.  Multilayer perceptron for EEG signal classification during listening to emotional music , 2007, TENCON 2007 - 2007 IEEE Region 10 Conference.

[30]  Geoffroy Peeters AN ADAPTIVE SYSTEM FOR MUSIC CLASSIFICATION AND TAGGING (MIREX 2009 SUBMISSION) , 2009 .

[31]  Hugo Fastl,et al.  Psychoacoustics Facts and Models. 2nd updated edition , 1999 .

[32]  Shinichi Furuya,et al.  Speed invariance of independent control of finger movements in pianists. , 2012, Journal of neurophysiology.

[33]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  An Exploration of Tonal Expectation Using Single-Trial EEG Classification , 2012 .

[34]  Juhan Nam,et al.  Learning Sparse Feature Representations for Music Annotation and Retrieval , 2012, ISMIR.

[35]  S. Gielen,et al.  The brain–computer interface cycle , 2009, Journal of neural engineering.

[36]  Raymond MacDonald,et al.  Acoustic analysis and mood classification of pain-relieving music. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  L. K. Hansen,et al.  Generalizable Patterns in Neuroimaging: How Many Principal Components? , 1999, NeuroImage.

[38]  Beth Logan,et al.  Mel Frequency Cepstral Coefficients for Music Modeling , 2000, ISMIR.

[39]  P.W.M. Desain What rhythm do I have in mind? Detection of Imagined temporal patterns from single trial ERP , 2004 .

[40]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques, 3rd Edition , 1999 .

[41]  Jean-Baptiste Poline,et al.  Inverse retinotopy: Inferring the visual content of images from brain activation patterns , 2006, NeuroImage.