Multiple Viewpoint Systems: Time Complexity and the Construction of Domains for Complex Musical Viewpoints in the Harmonization Problem

Abstract We discuss the problem of automatic four-part harmonization: given a soprano part, add alto, tenor and bass in accordance with the compositional practices of a particular musical era. In particular, we focus on the development of representational and modelling techniques, within the framework of multiple viewpoint systems and Prediction by Partial Match (PPM), for the creation of statistical models of four-part harmony by machine learning. Our ultimate goal is to create better models, according to the information theoretic measure cross-entropy, than have yet been produced. We use multiple viewpoint because of their ability to represent both surface and underlying musical structure, and because they have already been successfully applied to melodic modelling. To allow for the complexities of harmony, however, the framework must be extended; for example, we begin by predicting complete chords, and then extend the framework to allow part by part prediction. As the framework is extended and generalized, the viewpoints become more complex. This article discusses matters related to viewpoint domains (alphabets), such as their size and consequent effect on run time; and presents methods for their reliable construction. We also present an empirical analysis of the time complexity of our computer implementation.

[1]  Kemal Ebcioglu,et al.  An Expert System for Harmonizing Four-Part Chorales , 1988, ICMC.

[2]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  Harmonising Melodies: Why Do We Add the Bass Line First? , 2013, ICCC.

[3]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  Evaluating Cognitive Models of Musical Composition , 2007 .

[4]  John G. Cleary,et al.  Unbounded length contexts for PPM , 1995, Proceedings DCC '95 Data Compression Conference.

[5]  François Pachet,et al.  Representing temporal musical objects and reasoning in the MusES system , 1996 .

[6]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Conditional Random Fields: Probabilistic Models for Segmenting and Labeling Sequence Data , 2001, ICML.

[7]  David W. Aha,et al.  A Comparative Evaluation of Sequential Feature Selection Algorithms , 1995, AISTATS.

[8]  François Pachet,et al.  Formulating Constraint Satisfaction Problems on Part-Whole Relations : The Case of Automatic Musical Harmonization , 1998 .

[9]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  The Four-Part Harmonisation Problem : A comparison between Genetic Algorithms and a Rule-Based System , 1999 .

[10]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Multiple viewpoint systems for music prediction , 1995 .

[11]  Somnuk Phon-Amnuaisuk,et al.  Evolving Musical Harmonisation , 1999, ICANNGA.

[12]  Thomas H. Cormen,et al.  Introduction to algorithms [2nd ed.] , 2001 .

[13]  Wolfram Menzel,et al.  HARMONET: A Neural Net for Harmonizing Chorales in the Style of J. S. Bach , 1991, NIPS.

[14]  Shlomo Dubnov,et al.  Guessing the Composer's Mind: Applying Universal Prediction to Musical Style , 1999, ICMC.

[15]  Van Nostrand,et al.  Error Bounds for Convolutional Codes and an Asymptotically Optimum Decoding Algorithm , 1967 .

[16]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  PREDICTION AND ENTROPY OF MUSIC , 1990 .

[17]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  The zero-frequency problem: Estimating the probabilities of novel events in adaptive text compression , 1991, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[18]  Alberto Maria Segre,et al.  The Use of Twitter to Track Levels of Disease Activity and Public Concern in the U.S. during the Influenza A H1N1 Pandemic , 2011, PloS one.

[19]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  EXPECTATION IN MELODY: THE INFLUENCE OF CONTEXT AND LEARNING , 2006 .

[20]  Chris Mellish,et al.  Statistical Learning of Harmonic Movement , 1999 .

[21]  Darrell Conklin,et al.  Representation and Discovery of Vertical Patterns in Music , 2002, ICMAI.

[22]  Ronald L. Rivest,et al.  Introduction to Algorithms , 1990 .

[23]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  Improved Methods for Statistical Modelling of Monophonic Music , 2004 .

[24]  Xin-She Yang,et al.  Introduction to Algorithms , 2021, Nature-Inspired Optimization Algorithms.

[25]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  A Comparison of Statistical and Rule-Based Models of Melodic Segmentation , 2008, ISMIR.

[26]  Hinrich Schütze,et al.  Book Reviews: Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing , 1999, CL.

[27]  Preston,et al.  The English Hymnal , 1967 .

[28]  E. Newport,et al.  Science Current Directions in Psychological Statistical Learning : from Acquiring Specific Items to Forming General Rules on Behalf Of: Association for Psychological Science , 2022 .

[29]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  Auditory Expectation: The Information Dynamics of Music Perception and Cognition , 2012, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[30]  Andrew J. Viterbi,et al.  Error bounds for convolutional codes and an asymptotically optimum decoding algorithm , 1967, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[31]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  Methods for Combining Statistical Models of Music , 2004, CMMR.

[32]  Bradley J. Clement Learning Harmonic Progression Using Markov Models , 1998 .

[33]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  Melodic Grouping in Music Information Retrieval: New Methods and Applications , 2010, Advances in Music Information Retrieval.

[34]  Christopher K. I. Williams,et al.  Harmonising Chorales by Probabilistic Inference , 2004, NIPS.

[35]  Christopher Raphael,et al.  Harmonic analysis with probabilistic graphical models , 2003, ISMIR.

[36]  Moray Allan,et al.  Harmonising Chorales in the Style of Johann Sebastian Bach , 2002 .

[37]  Simon Dixon,et al.  Beat Tracking with Musical Knowledge , 2000, ECAI.

[38]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Data Compression Using Adaptive Coding and Partial String Matching , 1984, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[39]  Marcus T. Pearce,et al.  The construction and evaluation of statistical models of melodic structure in music perception and composition , 2005 .

[40]  John G. Cleary,et al.  MODELLING AND GENERATING MUSIC USING MULTIPLE VIEWPOINTS , 1988 .