Towards A Framework for the Evaluation of Machine Compositions

We outline a framework within which machine compositions may be evaluated objectively. In particular, the framework allows statements about those compositions to be refuted on the basis of empirical experimentation. We consider this to be fundamental if we wish to evaluate the degree to which our programs achieve their compositional aims. Furthermore, a review of the literature reveals that this is a largely ignored aspect of research into algorithmic composition. Our framework involves four components: specifying the compositional aims; inducing a critic from a set of example musical phrases; composing music that satisfies the critic; and evaluating specific claims about the compositions in experiments using human subjects. We describe a system which exemplifies these four stages and which demonstrates the practicality of the framework. Finally, the application of the framework to the evaluation of musical creativity is discussed and directions for future research are suggested.

[1]  Charles Ames,et al.  Quantifying musical merit , 1992 .

[2]  Ian Cross Music and Science: Three Views , 1998 .

[3]  Damon Horowitz,et al.  Generating Rhythms with Genetic Algorithms , 1994, AAAI.

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

[5]  Louis P. DiPalma,et al.  Music and Connectionism , 1991 .

[6]  Michael C. Mozer,et al.  Neural Network Music Composition by Prediction: Exploring the Benefits of Psychoacoustic Constraints and Multi-scale Processing , 1994, Connect. Sci..

[7]  Gary James Jason,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1988 .

[8]  Geraint A. Wiggins,et al.  AI Methods for Algorithmic Composition: A Survey, a Critical View and Future Prospects , 1999 .

[9]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Empirical Methods in AI , 1998, AI Mag..

[10]  Alan Marsden,et al.  Music, Intelligence and Artificiality , 2000, Readings in Music and Artificial Intelligence.

[11]  P. Todd,et al.  Musical networks: Parallel distributed perception and performance , 1999 .

[12]  Ralf D. Brown Creativity: What are we to measure? , 1989 .

[13]  Tanya Vladimirova,et al.  Genetic Algorithm Utilising Neural Network Fitness Evaluation for Musical Composition , 1997, ICANNGA.

[14]  Gerhard Widmer,et al.  On the Potential of Machine Learning for Music Research , 2000, Readings in Music and Artificial Intelligence.

[15]  I. Lakatos Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1976 .

[16]  Stephen Jay Gould,et al.  The Flamingo's Smile , 1986 .

[17]  Lee Spector,et al.  Criticism, Culture, and the Automatic Generation of Artworks , 1994, AAAI.

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

[19]  A. M. Turing,et al.  Computing Machinery and Intelligence , 1950, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[20]  Anthony Richard Burton,et al.  A hybrid neuro-genetic pattern evolution system applied to musical composition , 1998 .

[21]  David Ralley,et al.  Genetic Algorithms as a Tool for Melodic Development , 1995, ICMC.

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

[23]  M. Boden The creative mind : myths & mechanisms , 1991 .

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

[25]  M. Kendall,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery. , 1959 .

[26]  David Cope,et al.  Computers and Musical Style , 1993 .

[27]  Luke Windsor,et al.  Computational Modeling of Music Cognition: Problem or Solution? , 1998 .

[28]  Petri Toiviainen,et al.  Symbolic AI versus Connectionism in Music Research , 2000, Readings in Music and Artificial Intelligence.

[29]  Lee Spector,et al.  Induction and Recapitulation of Deep Musical Structure , 1995, IJCAI 1995.

[30]  John A. Biles,et al.  Life with GenJam: interacting with a musical IGA , 1999, IEEE SMC'99 Conference Proceedings. 1999 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (Cat. No.99CH37028).