Volume 1, Issue 1, January 2011 - DROPS - Schloss Dagstuhl

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Report from Dagstuhl Seminar 11041 Multimodal Music Processing Edited by Meinard Müller 1 , Masataka Goto 2 , and Simon Dixon 3 1 Saarland University and MPI Informatik - Saarbrücken, DE, meinard@mpi-inf.mpg.de 2 AIST – Ibaraki, JP, m.goto@aist.go.jp 3 Queen Mary University of London, GB, simon.dixon@eecs.qmul.ac.uk Abstract From January 23 to January 28, 2011, the Dagstuhl Seminar 11041 “Multimodal Music Processing” was held at Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics. During the seminar, we discussed various aspects of the automated processing of music-related documents. These documents may describe a musical work in different ways comprising visual representations (e. g., sheet music), symbolic representations (e. g., MIDI, tablatures, chords), acoustic representations (CD recordings), audio-visual representations (videos), or text-based metadata. In this report, we give an overview of the main contributions and results of the seminar. We start with an executive summary, which describes the main topics, goals, and group activities. Then one finds a list of abstracts giving a more detailed overview of the participants’ contributions as well as of the ideas and results discussed in the group meetings and panels of our seminar. Seminar 23.–28. January, 2011 – http://www.dagstuhl.de/11041 1998 ACM Subject Classification H.5.5 Sound and Music Computing, I.5.4 Applications— Waveform analysis, H.5.1 Multimedia Information Systems, J.5 Arts and Humanities Keywords and phrases Music information retrieval, music processing, multimodality, audio, sheet music, content-based analysis, signal processing, user interaction Digital Object Identifier 10.4230/DagRep.1.1.68 Edited in cooperation with Sebastian Ewert 1 Executive Summary Meinard Müller Masataka Goto Simon Dixon License Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Unported license © Meinard Müller. Masataka Goto, Simon Dixon Music can be described, represented, and experienced in various ways and forms. For example, music can be described in textual form not only supplying information on composers, musicians, specific performances, or song lyrics, but also offering detailed descriptions of structural, harmonic, melodic, and rhythmic aspects. Furthermore, music notation can be encoded in text-based formats such as MusicXML, or symbolic formats such as MIDI. Music annotations, metadata, and social tags are also widely available. Beside textual data, increasingly more types of music-related multimedia data such as audio, image or video data are widely available. For example, there are numerous MP3 and CD audio recordings, digitized images of scanned sheet music, and an increasing number of video clips of music performances. In this seminar we discussed and studied various aspects of the Except where otherwise noted, content of this report is licensed under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Unported license Multimodal Music Processing, Dagstuhl Reports, Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 68–101 Editors: Meinard Müller, Masataka Goto, and Simon Dixon Dagstuhl Reports Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl Publishing, Germany
Meinard Müller, Masataka Goto, and Simon Dixon 69 automated processing of music-related documents that vary in their modalities and formats, i.e., text, symbolic data, audio, image and video. Among others, the topics dealt with aspects of data analysis, retrieval, navigation, classification, and generation of music documents while considering music-specific characteristics, exploiting multiple information sources, and accounting for user-specific needs. In this executive summary, we give a brief overview of the main topics addressed in this seminar. We start by briefly describing the background of the seminar participants and the overall organization. We then give an overview of the presentations and the results from working groups and panels. Finally, we reflect on the most important aspects of this seminar and conclude with future implications. Participants, Interaction, Activities In our seminar, we had 35 participants, who came from various countries around the world including North America (7 participants), Japan (4 participants), New Zealand, Singapore, and Europe (Austria, France, Germany, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom). Most of the participants came to Dagstuhl for the first time and expressed enthusiasm about the open and retreat-like atmosphere. Besides its international character, the seminar was also highly interdisciplinary. While most of the participating researchers are working in computer science and its neighboring fields, a large number of participants also have a strong background in music and musicology. This made the seminar very special in having not only interactive and provoking scientific discussions, but also numerous social activities including common music making. One particular highlight of such social activities was a three-hour spontaneous concert on Thursday evening, where various participants performed in changing ensembles a wide variety of music including popular music, jazz, and classical music. Overall Organization and Schedule Dagstuhl seminars are known for having a high degree of flexibility and interactivity, which allow participants to discuss ideas and to raise questions rather than to present research results. Following this tradition, we fixed the schedule during the seminar asking for spontaneous contributions with future-oriented content, thus avoiding a conference-like atmosphere, where the focus is on past research achievements. The first day was used to let people introduce themselves and express their expectations and wishes for the seminar. We then had a brainstorming session on central topics covering the participants’ interests while discussing the overall schedule and format of our seminar. In particular, we identified a total of six topics for discussion. For four of these topics, we divided into four groups, each group discussing one of the topics in greater depth in parallel sessions on Tuesday. The results and conclusions of these group meetings were then presented to the plenum on Wednesday. For the remaining two topics, we decided on having panel-like discussions within the plenum with introductory stimulus talks (Thursday). Finally, group and panel discussions were interleaved with regular sessions that allowed participants to present their personal research to the plenum. This mixture of presentation elements gave all participants the opportunity for presenting their ideas to the plenum while avoiding a monotonous conference-like presentation format. 1 1 0 4 1
Page 1 and 2:
Volume 1, Issue 1, January 2011 Mul
Page 3 and 4:
Report from Dagstuhl Seminar 11011
Page 5 and 6:
Hans J. Boehm, Ursula Goltz, Holger
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20: Hans J. Boehm, Ursula Goltz, Holger
Page 29 and 30: Report from Dagstuhl Seminar 11021
Page 31 and 32: Sven Apel, William Cook, Krzysztof
Page 45 and 46: Zhenjiang Hu, Andy Schürr, Perdita
Page 69: Zhenjiang Hu, Andy Schürr, Perdita
Page 73 and 74: Meinard Müller, Masataka Goto, and
Page 105 and 106: Gabi Dreo Rodosek, Aiko Pras, Henni
Page 111 and 112: Stephan Dahlke, Michael Elad, Yonin
Page 121 and 122:
Stephan Dahlke, Michael Elad, Yonin
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129:
show all

Volume 1, Issue 1, January 2011 - DROPS - Schloss Dagstuhl

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?