Difference between revisions of "2005:Audio Drum Detection Results"

From MIREX Wiki
Line 16: Line 16:
 
| 3 || Tanghe, Degroeve, & De Baets 4 || 0.609 || 62.57% || 71.09% || 0.666 || 0.686 || 0.590 || 0.562 || 1342 || Y   
 
| 3 || Tanghe, Degroeve, & De Baets 4 || 0.609 || 62.57% || 71.09% || 0.666 || 0.686 || 0.590 || 0.562 || 1342 || Y   
 
|-
 
|-
−
| 4 Tanghe, Degroeve, & De Baets 1 || 0.599 || 60.02% || 72.45% || 0.657 || 0.677 || 0.588 || 0.542 || 1350 || Y   
+
| 4 || Tanghe, Degroeve, & De Baets 1 || 0.599 || 60.02% || 72.45% || 0.657 || 0.677 || 0.588 || 0.542 || 1350 || Y   
 
|-
 
|-
−
| 5 Dittmar, C. || 0.588 || 65.68% || 63.38% || 0.645 || 0.606 || 0.585 || 0.581 || 673 || R   
+
| 5 || Dittmar, C. || 0.588 || 65.68% || 63.38% || 0.645 || 0.606 || 0.585 || 0.581 || 673 || R   
 
|-
 
|-
−
| 6 Paulus, J. || 0.499 || 59.61% || 64.86% || 0.621 || 0.527 || 0.587 || 0.430 || 1137 || L   
+
| 6 || Paulus, J. || 0.499 || 59.61% || 64.86% || 0.621 || 0.527 || 0.587 || 0.430 || 1137 || L   
 
|-
 
|-
−
| 7 Gillet & Richard 2 || 0.443 || 77.09% || 40.63% || 0.532 || 0.598 || 0.334 || 0.428 || 21248 || F   
+
| 7 || Gillet & Richard 2 || 0.443 || 77.09% || 40.63% || 0.532 || 0.598 || 0.334 || 0.428 || 21248 || F   
 
|-
 
|-
−
| 8 Gillet & Richard 1 || 0.391 || 69.84% || 37.98% || 0.492 || 0.533 || 0.343 || 0.317 || 21997 || F  
+
| 8 || Gillet & Richard 1 || 0.391 || 69.84% || 37.98% || 0.492 || 0.533 || 0.343 || 0.317 || 21997 || F  
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}

Revision as of 21:56, 26 July 2010

Goal: To detect the occurences of drum events in polyphonic audio.

Dataset: At least 50 files of both live and sequenced music, with many genres encompassed and various degrees of drum audio contained in the files. Three collections of music were used: Christian Dittmar (CD), Koen Tanghe (KT) and Masataka Goto (MG). Participants were evaluated against music from each individual collection, and then the three collection scores are averaged to produce a composite score.

OVERALL
Rank Participant Total Average Classification F-measure Total Overall Onset Precision Total Overall Onset Recall Total Overall Onset F-measure BD Average F-measure HH Average F-measure SD Average F-measure Runtime (s) Machine
1 Yoshii, Goto, & Okuno 0.670 64.92% 67.02% 0.659 0.728 0.574 0.702 8534 B 0
2 Tanghe, Degroeve, & De Baets 3 0.611 63.30% 71.19% 0.670 0.688 0.601 0.555 1337 Y
3 Tanghe, Degroeve, & De Baets 4 0.609 62.57% 71.09% 0.666 0.686 0.590 0.562 1342 Y
4 Tanghe, Degroeve, & De Baets 1 0.599 60.02% 72.45% 0.657 0.677 0.588 0.542 1350 Y
5 Dittmar, C. 0.588 65.68% 63.38% 0.645 0.606 0.585 0.581 673 R
6 Paulus, J. 0.499 59.61% 64.86% 0.621 0.527 0.587 0.430 1137 L
7 Gillet & Richard 2 0.443 77.09% 40.63% 0.532 0.598 0.334 0.428 21248 F
8 Gillet & Richard 1 0.391 69.84% 37.98% 0.492 0.533 0.343 0.317 21997 F


CHRISTIAN DITTMAR COLLECTION
Rank Participant Total Average Classification F-measure Total Overall Onset Precision Total Overall Onset Recall Total Overall Onset F-measure BD Average F-measure HH Average F-measure SD Average F-measure Runtime (s) Machine



KOEN TANGHE COLLECTION
Rank Participant Total Average Classification F-measure Total Overall Onset Precision Total Overall Onset Recall Total Overall Onset F-measure BD Average F-measure HH Average F-measure SD Average F-measure Runtime (s) Machine



MASATAKA GOTO COLLECTION (50 songs from RWC Music Database: RWC-MDB-P-2001)
Rank Participant Total Average Classification F-measure Total Overall Onset Precision Total Overall Onset Recall Total Overall Onset F-measure BD Average F-measure HH Average F-measure SD Average F-measure Runtime (s) Machine



Retrieved from "https://music-ir.org/mirex/w/index.php?title=2005:Audio_Drum_Detection_Results&oldid=7432"