Difference between revisions of "2005:Audio Tempo Extraction Results"
From MIREX Wiki
(→Results) |
|||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|1 | |1 | ||
| − | |Alonso, David, & Richard | + | |[https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/alonso.pdf Alonso, David, & Richard] |
|0.689 (0.231) | |0.689 (0.231) | ||
|95.00% | |95.00% | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|2 | |2 | ||
| − | |Uhle, C. (1) | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/uhle.pdf Uhle, C. (1)] |
|0.675 (0.273) | |0.675 (0.273) | ||
|90.71% | |90.71% | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|3 | |3 | ||
| − | |Uhle, C. (2) | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/uhle.pdf Uhle, C. (2)] |
|0.675 (0.272) | |0.675 (0.272) | ||
|90.71% | |90.71% | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|4 | |4 | ||
| − | |Gouyon & Dixon (1) | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/gouyon.pdf Gouyon & Dixon (1)] |
|0.670 (0.252) | |0.670 (0.252) | ||
|92.14% | |92.14% | ||
| Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|5 | |5 | ||
| − | |Peeters, G. | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/peeters.pdf Peeters, G.] |
|0.656 (0.223) | |0.656 (0.223) | ||
|95.71% | |95.71% | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|6 | |6 | ||
| − | |Gouyon & Dixon (2) | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/gouyon.pdf Gouyon & Dixon (2)] |
|0.649 (0.253) | |0.649 (0.253) | ||
|92.14% | |92.14% | ||
| Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|7 | |7 | ||
| − | |Gouyon & Dixon (4) | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/gouyon.pdf Gouyon & Dixon (4)] |
|0.645 (0.294) | |0.645 (0.294) | ||
|87.14% | |87.14% | ||
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|8 | |8 | ||
| − | |Eck, D. | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/eck.pdf Eck, D.] |
|0.644 (0.300) | |0.644 (0.300) | ||
|86.43% | |86.43% | ||
| Line 108: | Line 108: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|9 | |9 | ||
| − | |Davies & Brossier | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/davies.pdf Davies & Brossier] |
|0.628 (0.284) | |0.628 (0.284) | ||
|86.43% | |86.43% | ||
| Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|10 | |10 | ||
| − | |Gouyon & Dixon (3) | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/gouyon.pdf Gouyon & Dixon (3)] |
|0.607 (0.287) | |0.607 (0.287) | ||
|87.14% | |87.14% | ||
| Line 130: | Line 130: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|11 | |11 | ||
| − | |Sethares, W. | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/sethares.pdf Sethares, W.] |
|0.597 (0.252) | |0.597 (0.252) | ||
|90.71% | |90.71% | ||
| Line 141: | Line 141: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|12 | |12 | ||
| − | |Brossier, P. | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/davies.pdf Brossier, P.] |
|0.583 (0.333) | |0.583 (0.333) | ||
|80.71% | |80.71% | ||
| Line 152: | Line 152: | ||
|---- | |---- | ||
|13 | |13 | ||
| − | |Tzanetakis, G. | + | |https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/tzanetakis.pdf Tzanetakis, G.] |
|0.538 (0.359) | |0.538 (0.359) | ||
|71.43% | |71.43% | ||
Revision as of 10:23, 31 July 2010
Introduction
Goal: The comparison and evaluation of current methods for the extraction of tempo from musical audio
Dataset: 140 wav files, 354 Megabytes
Results
| Rank | Participant | Score (std. deviation) | At Least One Tempo Correct | Both Tempos Correct | At Least One Phase Correct | Both Phases Correct | Mean Absolute Difference of Scored Saliences | Runtime (s) | Machine |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alonso, David, & Richard | 0.689 (0.231) | 95.00% | 55.71% | 25.00% | 5.00% | 0.239 | 2875 | G |
| 2 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/uhle.pdf Uhle, C. (1)] | 0.675 (0.273) | 90.71% | 59.29% | 32.14% | 7.14% | 0.222 | 1160 | F |
| 3 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/uhle.pdf Uhle, C. (2)] | 0.675 (0.272) | 90.71% | 59.29% | 32.86% | 6.43% | 0.222 | 2621 | F |
| 4 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/gouyon.pdf Gouyon & Dixon (1)] | 0.670 (0.252) | 92.14% | 56.43% | 40.71% | 7.86% | 0.311 | 3303 | G |
| 5 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/peeters.pdf Peeters, G.] | 0.656 (0.223) | 95.71% | 47.86% | 27.86% | 4.29% | 0.258 | 2159 | R |
| 6 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/gouyon.pdf Gouyon & Dixon (2)] | 0.649 (0.253) | 92.14% | 51.43% | 37.14% | 5.71% | 0.305 | 2050 | G |
| 7 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/gouyon.pdf Gouyon & Dixon (4)] | 0.645 (0.294) | 87.14% | 55.71% | 48.57% | 10.71% | 0.313 | 1357 | G |
| 8 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/eck.pdf Eck, D.] | 0.644 (0.300) | 86.43% | 53.57% | 37.14% | 5.71% | 0.230 | 1665 | Y |
| 9 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/davies.pdf Davies & Brossier] | 0.628 (0.284) | 86.43% | 48.57% | 26.43% | 4.29% | 0.224 | 1005 | R |
| 10 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/gouyon.pdf Gouyon & Dixon (3)] | 0.607 (0.287) | 87.14% | 47.14% | 36.43% | 6.43% | 0.294 | 1388 | R |
| 11 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/sethares.pdf Sethares, W.] | 0.597 (0.252) | 90.71% | 37.86% | 30.71% | 0.71% | 0.239 | 70975 | Y |
| 12 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/davies.pdf Brossier, P.] | 0.583 (0.333) | 80.71% | 51.43% | 28.57% | 2.14% | 0.223 | 180 | B 0 |
| 13 | https://www.music-ir.org/mirex/abstracts/2005/tzanetakis.pdf Tzanetakis, G.] | 0.538 (0.359) | 71.43% | 50.71% | 28.57% | 3.57% | 0.295 | 7173 | B 0 |
McNemar's Test Results
Statistical probability that algorithms have same error function: Note: Results of less than 5% indicate significant differences, results of 1% or less indicate highly significant differences.
| Tzanetakis, G. | Gouyon & Dixon (3) | Gouyon & Dixon (1) | Gouyon & Dixon (0) | Brossier, P. | Uhle, C. (1) | Uhle, C. (0) | Sethares, B | Peeters, G | Eck, D. | Davies, M. | Alonso, David, & Richard | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tzanetakis, G. | n/a | |||||||||||
| Gouyon & Dixon (3) | 17.44% | n/a | ||||||||||
| Gouyon & Dixon (1) | 50.00% | 19.58% | n/a | |||||||||
| Gouyon & Dixon (0) | 12.15% | 50.00% | 4.61% | n/a | ||||||||
| Brossier, P. | 50.00% | 23.54% | 55.31% | 20.05% | n/a | |||||||
| Uhle, C. (1) | 2.88% | 26.64% | 6.76% | 31.36% | 5.41% | n/a | ||||||
| Uhle, C. (0) | 2.88% | 26.64% | 6.31% | 30.89% | 5.86% | 75.00% | n/a | |||||
| Sethares, B. | 0.99% | 0.02% | 0.27% | 0.02% | 1.24% | 0.01% | 0.01% | n/a | ||||
| Peeters, G. | 34.70% | 7.19% | 29.83% | 6.32% | 30.73% | 2.40% | 2.40% | 2.97% | n/a | |||
| Eck, D. | 32.58% | 38.04% | 38.54% | 32.20% | 38.54% | 12.15% | 12.15% | 0.41% | 18.32% | n/a | ||
| Davies, M. | 38.77% | 7.17% | 33.59% | 6.31% | 33.89% | 2.67% | 2.67% | 1.38% | 50.00% | 21.35% | n/a | |
| Alsonso, David, & Richard | 18.02% | 56.12% | 23.99% | 50.00% | 23.99% | 26.64% | 26.64% | 0.04% | 7.62% | 39.39% | 6.07% | n/a |
