Measuring musical rhythm similarity : Transformation versus feature-based methods

Background in musicology. A central problem in musicology is to develop classification algorithms that match the way human observers perceive musical rhythm similarity and pass on music forms as cultural knowledge. Rhythm similarity measures that have been investigated in the past fall into two categories: transformation methods and feature-based methods. In the former the similarity is measured by the amount of effort required to transform (morph, mutate) one rhythm into another. One of the most well know transformation measures is the edit distance, defined as the minimum number of mutations required to transform one rhythm to the other. The mutations here are insertions, deletions, and substitutions of symbols in a sequence. In the feature-based methods a set of pre-determined features is calculated for each rhythm, and similarity is measured by the degree to which the two sets of features match. Typical features measure properties of the inter-onset intervals present in a rhythm. For either approach, a measure of rhythm similarity is desired that is not only efficient to compute, but that agrees well with human perceptual judgments of rhythm similarity. Background in cultural evolutionary biology. Phylogenetic trees were originally conceived for the purposes of describing and visualizing evolutionary relationships that exist between members of a group of biological organisms. However, more recently they have been applied to cultural objects as well, language being an early prime example. Phylogenetic tree construction approaches fall into two main categories: distance-based methods and “character”based methods. Distance methods assume that a distance matrix is available containing the distance between every pair of objects being studied. In character-based methods the input data are sets of binary and/or multistate characters, and the final observed distribution of characters is modeled as resulting from a set of inferred transition probabilities. Aims. By combining phylogenetic tools from cultural evolutionary biology with the cognitive and computational study of measures of rhythm similarity from musicology and music theory, this project aims to create a synergistic bridge between these two domains of knowledge. Main contribution. A feature-based approach to rhythm similarity is compared to a frequently used transformation method, using a family of rhythms of equal length. Distance matrices calculated from the rhythms are compared with ‘dissimilarity’ matrices obtained from human judgments using Mantel tests. Two different phylogenetic analysis techniques are also compared: a distance based method and a Bayesian approach. The results provide evidence from the music domain that supports the hypothesis that transformation methods are superior to feature-based methods for modeling more general human similarity judgments. Implications. Our results highlight the difficulty of modeling rhythm similarity by means of purely structural features collected from musicology and music theory, and imply that more attention should be devoted to the study of transformation methods. The methods explored here, standard in evolutionary biology and anthropology, provide novel tools for musicology and music theory that complement traditional historical and ethnographic accounts.

[1]  Charlotte Truchet,et al.  Computation of words satisfying the "rhythmic oddity property" (after Simha Arom's works) , 2003, Inf. Process. Lett..

[2]  P. Liebermann,et al.  Symmetry in question and answer sequences in music , 1990 .

[3]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern classification, 2nd Edition , 2000 .

[4]  The Integration of Pitch and Rhythm in Musical Judgment: Testing Age-Related Trends in Novice Listeners , 1997 .

[5]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  A Mathematical Analysis of African, Brazilian, and Cuban Clave Rhythms , 2002 .

[6]  Robert A. Wagner,et al.  An Extension of the String-to-String Correction Problem , 1975, JACM.

[7]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  A Comparison of Rhythmic Similarity Measures , 2004, ISMIR.

[8]  Shane S. Sturrock,et al.  Time Warps, String Edits, and Macromolecules – The Theory and Practice of Sequence Comparison . David Sankoff and Joseph Kruskal. ISBN 1-57586-217-4. Price £13.95 (US$22·95). , 2000 .

[9]  Nick Chater,et al.  Understanding Similarity: A Joint Project for Psychology, Case-Based Reasoning, and Law , 1998, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[10]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  The Euclidean Algorithm Generates Traditional Musical Rhythms , 2005 .

[11]  Andrew R. Brown,et al.  Statistical Analysis of the features of diatonic music using jMusic software , 2001 .

[12]  David Temperley,et al.  Modeling Common-Practice Rhythm , 2010 .

[13]  A. Tversky Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[14]  Dan Gusfield,et al.  Algorithms on Strings, Trees, and Sequences - Computer Science and Computational Biology , 1997 .

[15]  Stephen Shennan,et al.  Branching, blending, and the evolution of cultural similarities and differences among human populations , 2006 .

[16]  N. N. Voront︠s︡ov,et al.  The Use of Tree Comparison Metrics , 1985 .

[17]  Kofi Agawu,et al.  Structural Analysis or Cultural Analysis? Competing Perspectives on the "Standard Pattern" of West African Rhythm , 2006 .

[18]  L. Polansky,et al.  Temporal Gestalt Perception in Music , 1980 .

[19]  Savrina F. Carrizo Phylogenetic Trees: An Information Visualisation Perspective , 2004, APBC.

[20]  Daniel P. W. Ellis,et al.  A Large-Scale Evaluation of Acoustic and Subjective Music-Similarity Measures , 2004, Computer Music Journal.

[21]  F. Attneave,et al.  What Variables Produce Similarity Grouping , 1970 .

[22]  Robin Wilson,et al.  Music and Mathematics: From Pythagoras to Fractals , 2006 .

[23]  G. Toussaint The Rhythm that Conquered the World : What Makes a “ Good ” Rhythm Good ? , 2010 .

[24]  P. Lewis A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. , 2001, Systematic biology.

[25]  WHY DO IT THAT WAY? RHYTHMIC MODELS AND MOTIFS IN KOREAN PERCUSSION BANDS , 1991 .

[26]  G. Toussaint Generating "Good" Musical Rhythms Algorithmically , 2010 .

[27]  Ian Cross,et al.  The Effect of Structural and Performance Factors in the Perception of Anacruses , 2009 .

[28]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  Classification and Phylogenetic Analysis of African Ternary Rhythm Timelines , 2003 .

[29]  Timothy P. Byron,et al.  The pulse of symmetry: On the possible co-evolution of rhythm in music and dance , 2009 .

[30]  Dan Gusfield Algorithms on Strings, Trees, and Sequences - Computer Science and Computational Biology , 1997 .

[31]  Jay Rahn,et al.  Turning the Analysis around: Africa-Derived Rhythms and Europe-Derived Music Theory , 1996 .

[32]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  Measuring Similarity between Flamenco Rhythmic Patterns , 2009 .

[33]  N. Saitou,et al.  The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. , 1987, Molecular biology and evolution.

[34]  Raymond Boyd,et al.  African polyphony and polyrhythm: Map , 1991 .

[35]  T. Eerola,et al.  Statistical Features and Perceived Similarity of Folk Melodies , 2001 .

[36]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  Rhythm Complexity Measures: A Comparison of Mathematical Models of Human Perception and Performance , 2008, ISMIR.

[37]  J. Montagu International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music , 1974 .

[38]  M A Newton,et al.  Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference via Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods , 1999, Biometrics.

[39]  Thomas Noll,et al.  WF Scales, ME Sets, and Christoffel Words , 2007 .

[40]  Daniel H. Huson,et al.  SplitsTree-a program for analyzing and visualizing evolutionary data , 1997 .

[41]  Remco C. Veltkamp,et al.  Searching notated polyphonic music using transportation distances , 2004, MULTIMEDIA '04.

[42]  Rose Brandel The African Hemiola Style , 1959 .

[43]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Comparing human and computational models of music prediction , 1994 .

[44]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  Mathematical Features for Recognizing Preference in Sub-saharan African Traditional Rhythm Timelines , 2005, ICAPR.

[45]  O F Herrero Symmetry in music , 2010 .

[46]  R. Mace,et al.  The evolution of cultural diversity : a phylogenetic approach , 2005 .

[47]  Vera Proca-Ciortea On Rhythm in Rumanian Folk Dance , 1969 .

[48]  Rajeev Raman,et al.  String-Matching techniques for musical similarity and melodic recognition , 1998 .

[49]  E. Dietz Permutation Tests for Association Between Two Distance Matrices , 1983 .

[50]  N. Chater,et al.  Concepts and Similarity , 1997 .

[51]  Karen A. Cerulo Analyzing cultural products: A new method of measurement , 1988 .

[52]  Christopher J. Howe,et al.  The phylogeny of The Canterbury Tales , 1998, Nature.

[53]  N. Chater,et al.  Similarity and rules: distinct? exhaustive? empirically distinguishable? , 1998, Cognition.

[54]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  El Compás Flamenco: A Phylogenetic Analysis , 2004 .

[55]  Joseph B. Kruskal,et al.  Time Warps, String Edits, and Macromolecules , 1999 .

[56]  Minghui Jiang,et al.  On the sum of distances along a circle , 2008, Discret. Math..

[57]  Pierre Hanna,et al.  Optimizations of Local Edition for Evaluating Similarity Between Monophonic Musical Sequences , 2007, RIAO.

[58]  Luke J. Matthews The Recognition Signal Hypothesis for the Adaptive Evolution of Religion , 2012, Human nature.

[59]  John P. Huelsenbeck,et al.  MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models , 2003, Bioinform..

[60]  Jeff Pressing,et al.  Asymmetric Cognitive Clock Structures in West African Rhythms , 1997 .

[61]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Sequence-based melodic comparison: a dynamic programming approach , 1998 .

[62]  M. Feldman Crippled Symmetry , 1981, RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics.

[63]  Godfried T. Toussaint,et al.  The Geometry of Musical Rhythm , 2013, JCDCG.

[64]  Shigeo Abe DrEng Pattern Classification , 2001, Springer London.

[65]  Yves Van de Peer,et al.  zt: A Sofware Tool for Simple and Partial Mantel Tests , 2002 .

[66]  Peter M. Todd,et al.  Evolution of rhythm as an indicator of mate quality , 2009 .

[67]  Luke J. Matthews,et al.  Cultural inheritance or cultural diffusion of religious violence? A quantitative case study of the Radical Reformation , 2013 .

[68]  N. Chater,et al.  Transformation and alignment in similarity , 2009, Cognition.

[69]  Godfried T. Toussaint Malcolm Campbell Naor Brown Computational Models of Symbolic Rhythm Similarity: Correlation with Human Judgments , 2011 .

[70]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  The Mathematical Foundations of Learning Machines , 1990 .

[71]  N. Chater,et al.  Similarity as transformation , 2003, Cognition.

[72]  R. Shepard Stimulus and response generalization: A stochastic model relating generalization to distance in psychological space , 1957 .

[73]  D. Huson,et al.  Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. , 2006, Molecular biology and evolution.

[74]  Eric Thul and Godfried T. Toussaint A Comparative Phylogenetic-Tree Analysis of African Timelines and North Indian Talas , 2008 .

[75]  John P. Huelsenbeck,et al.  MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees , 2001, Bioinform..

[76]  Emmanuel Amiot David Lewin and maximally even sets , 2007 .

[77]  Jack Douthett,et al.  Maximally Even Sets , 1991 .

[78]  L. Tierney Markov Chains for Exploring Posterior Distributions , 1994 .