Slicing It All Ways: Mathematical Models for Tonal Induction, Approximation, and Segmentation Using the Spiral Array

References

• Cambouropoulos E. Pitch spelling: A computational model. Music Perception (2003) 20:411–430Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chew E. Towards a mathematical model of tonality. (2000) . Ph.D. thesis, Operations Research Center, Massachussetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Chew E., Moore J. D., Stenning K. Modeling tonality: Applications to music cognition. 23rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (2001) Edinburgh, Scotland, UK(Lawrence Erlbaum Associate Publishers, Mahwah, NJ/London, UK)206–211Google Scholar
• Chew E., Anagnostopoulou C., Ferrand M., Smail A. The spiral array: An algorithm for determining key boundaries. Music and Artificial Intelligence. Proc. 2nd Internat. Conf. LNCS/LNAI 2445 (2002) Springer, Berlin, Germany:18–31Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chew E., Chen Y.-C., Bhargava H. K., Ye N. Mapping MIDI to the spiral array: Disambiguating pitch spellings. Computational Modeling and Problem Solving in the Networked World. Proc. 8th INFORMS Comput. Soc. Conf. (2003a) Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands:259–275Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chew E., Chen Y.-C. Determining context-defining windows: Pitch spelling using the spiral array. Proc. 4th Internat. Conf. Music Inform. Retrieval (2003b) Baltimore, MDGoogle Scholar
• Chew E., Chen Y.-C. Real-time pitch spelling using the spiral array. Comput. Music J. (2005) 29(2):61–76Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chew E., François A. R. J. MuSA.RT—Music on the spiral array real-time. ACM Multimedia Conf. 2003 (2003) Berkeley, CA(ACM Press, New York) 448–449Google Scholar
• Gomez E. Tonal description of polyphonic audio for music content processing. INFORMS J. Comput. (2006) 18(2):294–304Link, Google Scholar
• Krumhansl C. L.Cognitive Foundations of Musical Pitch (1990) (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK) Google Scholar
• Longuet-Higgins H. C. Two letters To a musical friend. The Music Rev. (1962) 23:244–228, 271–280Google Scholar
• Longuet-Higgins H. C. Perception of melodies. Nature (1976) 263:646–653Crossref, Google Scholar
• Longuet-Higgins H. C., Steedman M. J. On interpreting Bach. Machine Intelligence (1971) 6:221–241Google Scholar
• MacDowell E. To a wild rose. (1896) . Woodland Sketches Op.51 No.1. EPS file typeset in SCORE by Craig Sapp. http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/∼craig/scoreGoogle Scholar
• Meredith D., Kopiez R., Lehmann A. C., Wolther I., Wolf C. Pitch spelling algorithms. Proc. 5th Triennial ESCOM Conf. (2003) Hanover University of Music and Drama, Hanover, Germany:204–207Google Scholar
• Meredith D. Comparing pitch spelling algorithms on a large corpus of tonal music. Proc. Comput. Music Modeling and Retrieval 2004, LNCS 3310 (2004) Verlag, Berlin, Germany:173–192Google Scholar
• Pickens J., Bello J. P., Monti G., Sandler M., Crawford T., Dovey M., Byrd D. Polyphonic score retrieval using polyphonic audio queries: A harmonic modeling approach. J. New Music Res. (2003) 32:223–236Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schubert F.Impromptus and Moments Musicaux (1828) (G. Henle Verlag, Munich, Germany) Google Scholar
• Shmulevich I., Yli-Harja O. Localized key-finding: Algorithms and applications. Music Perception (2000) 17:531–544Crossref, Google Scholar
• Temperley D. What’s key for key? The Krumhansl-Schmuckler key-finding algorithm reconsidered. Music Perception (1999) 17:65–100Crossref, Google Scholar
• Temperley D.The Cognition of Basic Musical Structures (2001) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Toiviainen P., Krumhansl C. L. Measuring and modeling real-time responses to music: The dynamics of tonality induction. Perception (2003) 32:741–766Crossref, Google Scholar