Talk:Symbolic Melodic - Revision history

131.211.81.134: /* Other ideas */

2005-02-25T18:28:01Z

‎Other ideas

2005-02-25T18:27:44Z

2005-02-21T02:44:31Z

My two cents

2005-02-03T11:22:58Z

‎Open points

2005-02-03T11:22:42Z

New page

===Open points===

Copyright. Any opinions on whether we need to contact RISM? If so, what would be the best way?

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Thank you!
-== Other ideas ==
+== Other idea ==
 In case copyright problems prove to be insurmountable, the ground truth data could also be used in a different way: instead of letting all algorithms search the entire collection, just let them rank all incipits that are present in the ground truth. Then use the same measure that I suggested for the comparison based on the ground truth. Less interesting, but also much less work and probably not as sensitive copyright-wise.
 Rainer

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:27, 25 February 2005
Line 12:		Line 12:

	Thank you!		Thank you!
		+
		+	== Other ideas ==
		+	In case copyright problems prove to be insurmountable, the ground truth data could also be used in a different way: instead of letting all algorithms search the entire collection, just let them rank all incipits that are present in the ground truth. Then use the same measure that I suggested for the comparison based on the ground truth. Less interesting, but also much less work and probably not as sensitive copyright-wise.
		+
		+	Rainer

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:44, 21 February 2005
Line 2:		Line 2:

	* Copyright. Any opinions on whether we need to contact RISM? If so, what would be the best way?		* Copyright. Any opinions on whether we need to contact RISM? If so, what would be the best way?
		+
		+	== My two cents ==
		+
		+	It is great to have the ground truth set up. Thank you for the painstaking efforts! And I hope more queries can be added in the future.
		+
		+	For the second evaluation, we can try the pool method in TREC: let experts judge on items retreved by all participant teams, items not retrieved by any team are assumed to be irrelevant. It is fair to all participants, but need experts' judgment.
		+
		+	For the first evaluation, I agree we will need to consider those items ignored in building the ground truth. Again, experts' judgment is needed. Can we ask music librarian or music students for help?
		+
		+	Thank you!

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:22, 3 February 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	===Open points===		===Open points===

−	Copyright. Any opinions on whether we need to contact RISM? If so, what would be the best way?	+	* Copyright. Any opinions on whether we need to contact RISM? If so, what would be the best way?