2008:Audio Melody Extraction - Revision history

IMIRSELBot: Robot: Automated text replacement (-\[http:\/\/(www.)?music-ir.org\/mirex\/200([5-9])\/index.php\/([^\s]+)( .+)?\] +200\2:\3)

2010-06-07T19:08:32Z

Robot: Automated text replacement (-\[http:\/\/(www.)?music-ir.org\/mirex\/200([5-9])\/index.php\/([^\s]+)( .+)?\] +200\2:\3)

2010-05-13T18:23:31Z

Robot: Automated text replacement (-\[\[([A-Z][^:]+)\]\] +2008:\1)

2008-09-12T12:12:17Z

‎Potential Participants

2008-09-10T11:24:20Z

‎Potential Participants

2008-09-10T11:23:32Z

2008-08-14T07:48:36Z

‎Potential Participants

2008-08-12T12:54:36Z

‎Goal

2008-08-12T05:34:54Z

2008-08-12T05:33:39Z

2008-08-12T05:32:59Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-[this page is for now a pale copy/paste of MIREX06 webpage: [https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/2006/index.php/Audio_Melody_Extraction Audio_Melody_Extraction]]
+[this page is for now a pale copy/paste of MIREX06 webpage: [[2006:Audio_Melody_Extraction]]
 =Goal=
 To extract the melody line from polyphonic audio.

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 =RESULTS=
-The results for the audio melody extraction task are available on the following page: [[Audio_Melody_Extraction_Results]]
+The results for the audio melody extraction task are available on the following page: [[2008:Audio_Melody_Extraction_Results]]
 =JL's Comments 11/07/08=

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 * Matti Ryyn├ñnen and Anssi Klapuri (Tampere University of Technology), matti.ryynanen <at> tut.fi, anssi.klapuri <at> tut.fi
 * Chuan Cao and Ming Li (ThinkIT Lab., IOA), ccao <at> hccl.ioa.ac.cn, mli <at> hccl.ioa.ac.cn
 =JL's Comments 11/07/08=

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 * Jean-Louis Durrieu (TELECOM ParisTech, formerly ENST), durrieu@enst.fr
 * Pablo Cancela (pcancela@gmail.com)
-* Vishweshwara Rao, Preeti Rao (Indian Institute of Technology Bombay), vishu_rao@iitb.ac.in, prao@ee.iitb.ac.in
+* Vishweshwara Rao and Preeti Rao (Indian Institute of Technology Bombay), vishu_rao@iitb.ac.in, prao@ee.iitb.ac.in
 * Karin Dressler (kadressler@gmail.com)
 * Matti Ryyn├ñnen and Anssi Klapuri (Tampere University of Technology), matti.ryynanen <at> tut.fi, anssi.klapuri <at> tut.fi

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 * Jean-Louis Durrieu (TELECOM ParisTech, formerly ENST), durrieu@enst.fr
 * Pablo Cancela (pcancela@gmail.com)
-* Vishweshwara Rao (Indian Institute of Technology), vishu_rao@iitb.ac.in
+* Vishweshwara Rao, Preeti Rao (Indian Institute of Technology Bombay), vishu_rao@iitb.ac.in, prao@ee.iitb.ac.in
 * Karin Dressler (kadressler@gmail.com)
 * Matti Ryyn├ñnen and Anssi Klapuri (Tampere University of Technology), matti.ryynanen <at> tut.fi, anssi.klapuri <at> tut.fi

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 =Goal=
 To extract the melody line from polyphonic audio.
 =Description=
 The aim of the MIREX audio melody extraction evaluation is to identify the melody pitch contour from polyphonic musical audio. The task consists of two parts: Voicing detection (deciding whether a particular time frame contains a "melody pitch" or not), and pitch detection (deciding the most likely melody pitch for each time frame). We structure the submission to allow these parts to be done independently, i.e. it is possible (via a negative pitch value) to guess a pitch even for frames that were being judged unvoiced. Algorithms which don't perform a discrimination between melodic and non-melodic parts are also welcome!

@@ Line 118: / Line 118: @@
 Hi all! <Br>
 I apologise if I was not clear enough before. When I said that "The alignment would depend on the hop size and nothing else.", I assumed that the center of the first analysis window is at 0 sec. This means that irrespective of window length, the window centers would always be at the same time instants i.e. 0, 10ms, 20ms...<Br>
-On observing the ground truth files for the ISMIR 2004 testing dataset and the MIREX 2005 training dataset, this seems to be the convention they too follow since the timestamp of the first ground-truth value is 0 sec, which should correspond to the center of the first analysis window. This is the convention that we have followed for our Indian music data. Hope this clarifies things.
+On observing the ground truth files for the ISMIR 2004 testing dataset and the MIREX 2005 training dataset, this seems to be the convention they too follow since the time-stamp of the first ground truth value is 0 sec, which should correspond to the center of the first analysis window. This is the convention that we have followed for our Indian music data. Hope this clarifies things.

@@ Line 115: / Line 115: @@
 <br>
 But again, for our purpose, I guess the way the annotations has been done is more than sufficient! And new data for evaluation is always welcome! Thank you again for your effort!
-== Vishu's comments 12/08/08==
+= Vishu's comments 12/08/08=
 Hi all! <Br>
 I apologise if I was not clear enough before. When I said that "The alignment would depend on the hop size and nothing else.", I assumed that the center of the first analysis is window is at 0 sec. This means that irrespective of window length, the window centres would always be at the same time instants i.e. 0, 10ms, 20ms...<Br>
 On observing the ground truth files for the ISMIR 2004 testing dataset and the MIREX 2005 training dataset, this seems to be the convention they too follow since the timestamp of the first ground-truth value is 0 sec, which should correspond to the center of the first analysis window. This is the convention that we have followed for our Indian music data. Hope this clarifies things.