Using Connectionist Models to Explore Complex Musical Patterns
Using Connectionist Models to Explore Complex Musical Patterns
复制标题
使用联结主义模型探索复杂的音乐模式
DOI：
10.2307/3680013
复制
发表时间：
1989
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Robert O. Gjerdingen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Robert O. Gjerdingen
音乐老师经常要求学生做音乐听写。老师通常会演奏一段简短的选段，也许是巴赫赞美诗中的一个乐句，然后学生们试图将各种音高和音长转换成标准乐谱的符号。每一个产生的符号都可以被判断为真或假，对或错。音乐教师也要求学生分析巴赫合唱团中乐句的音乐句法。由此产生的答案可能会有不同程度的真实或虚假。学生们对于如何解释模棱两可的音乐事件或在前景中有一个意义而在回顾中有第二个意义的事件，可能会有合理的意见分歧。不仅学生对复杂音乐模式的评价不同。众所周知，18世纪音乐界公认的专家们对一个乐句中的和弦、节奏、轮廓、旋律、织体、音色和对位是如何相互作用的意见不一。联结主义模型提供了优雅的方式来处理复调、和声导向音乐中的多维复杂性。例如，可以将音乐事件定义为激活的输入模式，该激活的输入模式然后由互连的处理单元的网络转换成表示事件的解释的激活的输出模式。允许学习的模型通常需要一个明确的教师，准备明确地说明输出模式是否错误以及错误的程度（Rumelhart，欣顿和威廉姆斯，1986; Werbos，1988）。对于相对较低层次的音乐任务，如上面描述的转录问题，这一要求不会造成严重的障碍;但对于较高层次的任务，明确的教师的概念就成了问题。例如，有人想知道，如果有人声称一个乐句的一种解释只有另一种解释的69%是正确的，是否会感到舒服？另一类联结主义模型
Music teachers often ask their classes to take musical dictation. The teacher commonly plays a short excerpt, perhaps a phrase from a Bach chorale, and then the students attempt to translate the various pitches and durations into the symbols of standard musical notation. Each resulting symbol can be judged true or false, right or wrong. Music teachers also ask their classes to analyze the musical syntax of phrases from Bach chorales. The resulting answers will likely have varying shades of truth or falsity. Students can have legitimate differences of opinion about how to interpret ambiguous musical events or events that have one meaning in prospect and a second in retrospect. And not only students differ in their assessments of complex musical patterns. Acknowledged experts in eighteenth-century music are known to disagree about how, in a given phrase, the chords, rhythms, contours, melodies, textures, timbres, and counterpoint all interact. Connectionist models offer elegant ways of dealing with multidimensional complexity of the type found in polyphonic, harmonically oriented music. One can, for example, define a musical event as an input pattern of activation that is then transformed by a network of interconnected processing units into an output pattern of activation representing an interpretation of the event. Models that allow for learning often require an explicit teacher prepared to state unambiguously whether, and to what degree, the output pattern is in error (Rumelhart, Hinton, and Williams 1986; Werbos 1988). For relatively low-level musical tasks, like the transcription problem described above, this requirement poses no serious obstacle; but for higher-level tasks, the notion of an explicit teacher becomes problematical. One wonders, for example, if anyone would be comfortable in claiming that one interpretation of a musical phrase is only 69 percent as true as another? An alternative class of connectionist models