Computers and the Humanities

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 105–110 | Cite as

On the combinatorial complexity of fuzzy pattern matching in music analysis

  • Richard E. Overill
Article

Abstract

In music analysis it is a common requirement to search a musical score for occurrences of a particular musical motif and its variants. This tedious and time-consuming task can be carried out by computer, using one of several models to specify which variants are to be included in the search. The question arises: just how many variants must be explicitly considered? The answer has a profound effect on the computer time needed. In this paper, recurrence relations and closed form analytic expressions are derived for the run time complexity of two models of “fuzzy pattern matching” for use in music analysis; each model assumes the existence of an atomic exact pattern matching operation. The formulae so obtained are evaluated and tabulated as a function of their independent parameters. These results enable a priori estimates to be made of the relative run times of different music searches performed using either model. This is illustrated by applying the results to an actual musical example.

Key Words

music analysis combinatorial complexity analytic formulae recurrence relations approximate string matching 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abramowitz, M., and I.A. Stegun, eds.A Handbook of Mathematical Functions. New York: Dover, 1972, p.822.Google Scholar
  2. Bach, J.S. “Die Kunst der Fuge” (BWV 1080).Contrapunctus XVIII, bb. 193–4 et seq., 1975. Frankfurt: Edition Peters, Nr.218.Google Scholar
  3. Bollinger, R.C. “Fibonacci K-sequences, Pascal T-trianglesl” and K-in-a-row Problems.”Fibonacci Quarterly, 22 (1984), 146–51.Google Scholar
  4. Emmer, M.B.SNOBOL4+: The SNOBOL4 Language for the PC User. Englewood, NJ: McGraw-Hill, 1985.Google Scholar
  5. Galil, Z., and R. Giancarlo. “Data Structures and Algorithms for Approximate String Matching.”Journal of Complexity, 4 (1988), 33–72.Google Scholar
  6. Galil, Z., and K. Park. “An Improved Algorithm for Approximate String Matching.”SIAM Journal on Computing, 19 (1990), 989–99.Google Scholar
  7. Mongeau, M., and D. Sankoff. “Comparison of Musical Sequences.”Computers and the Humanities, 24 (1990), 161–75.Google Scholar
  8. Pearce, A.T.P. “MAP-A Computer Program for Music Information Retrieval.” Ph.D. Thesis. University of London, 1992.Google Scholar
  9. Philippou, A.N. “A Note on the Fibonacci Sequence of Order K and the Multinomial Coefficients.”Fibonacci Quarterly, 21 (1983), 82–86.Google Scholar
  10. Sankoff, D., and J.B. Kruskal, eds.Time Warps, String Edits, and Macromolecules: The Theory and Practice of Sequence Comparison. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1983.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard E. Overill
    • 1
  1. 1.Algorithm Design Group, Department of Computer ScienceKing's College LondonStrand, LondonUK

Personalised recommendations