Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of cs/LaboratorniSeminar/2019MusicologySears


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Feb 16, 2019, 1:09:13 PM (3 years ago)
Author:
Ales Horak
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • cs/LaboratorniSeminar/2019MusicologySears

    v1 v1  
     1= Collocations in music? What systematic musicology can learn from corpus linguistics
     2
     3== Author: David R. W. Sears
     4
     5== Monday, March 11, 2019
     6== NLP lab, room B203
     7
     8
     9=== Abstract:
     10
     11Like language, much of the world’s music exhibits certain design features—namely, recurrence,
     12syntax, and recursion—that both exploit and reflect the psychological mechanisms by which
     13listeners organize sensory stimuli (Fitch 2006). As a result, allusions to principles of
     14linguistic organization abound in music research (e.g., Lerdahl & Jackendoff 1983; Rohrmeier
     152011). Yet despite recent strides by the linguistics community to discover potentially analogous
     16organizational principles of natural languages using data-driven methods, applications of
     17statistical modeling procedures have yet to gain sufficient traction in music research.
     18
     19
     20
     21To resolve this issue, this paper considers how string-based methods for the discovery of
     22collocations in natural language corpora might generalize to recurrent chord progressions in
     23symbolic music corpora. To that end, I present a modeling pipeline that (1) selects an appropriate
     24representation scheme for the symbolic encoding of chords; (2) applies the skip-gram method to
     25identify 3- and 4-gram types consisting of potentially non-contiguous members; (3) excludes types
     26reflecting “parts of music” (POM) that are rarely associated with interesting musical expressions
     27(Manning & Schutze, 1999); and (4) calculates contingency tables and extended association measures
     28that rank each type according to the statistical attraction between its members (Kilgarriff et
     29al., 2012; Petrovic et al., 2010). In short, this pipeline produces convincing n-best lists for
     30the discovery of meaningful harmonic progressions, though evaluating these lists using annotated
     31corpora has yet to be conducted in the musicology community. I conclude by discussing possible
     32limitations and future directions associated with the language metaphor in systematic musicology.
     33
     34
     35
     36=== Bio:
     37
     38David Sears is Assistant Professor of Interdisciplinary Arts and Director of the Performing Arts
     39Research Lab at Texas Tech University. Upon completing his PhD in music theory at !McGill
     40University in Montreal, Canada, he held a post-doctoral research position in the Institute of
     41Computational Perception at Johannes Kepler University in Austria. His research interests include
     42music perception and cognition, computational approaches to music theory and analysis, emotion and
     43psychophysiology, and sensorimotor synchronization. Recent publications have appeared in the
     44Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Music Perception, the Psychology of Music,
     45the Journal of New Music Research, and the International Journal of Psychophysiology.