Tree-Structured Representation of Musical Information

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2652)


The success of the Internet has filled the net with lots of symbolic representations of music works. Two kinds of problems arise to the user: content-based search of music and the identification of similar works. Both belong to the pattern recognition domain. In contrast to most of the existing approaches, we pose a non-linear representation of a melody, based on trees that express the metric and rhythm of music in a natural way. This representation provide a number of advantages: more musical significance, more compact representation and others. Here we have worked on the comparison of melodies for identification.


Multimedia applications computer music structural recognition 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Shasha, S., Zhang, K.: Approximate Tree Pattern Matching. Pattern Matching Algorithms, pp. 341–371. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ó Maidin, D.: A geometrical algorithm melodic difference. Computing in Musicology, pp. 65–72. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mongeau, M., Sankoff, D.: Comparison of musical sequences. Computers and the Humanities 24, 161–175 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smith, L.A., McNab, R.J., Witten, I.H.: Sequence-Based Melodic Comparison: A Dynamic-Programming Approach. In: Melodic Similarity, Concepts, Procedures, and Applications, MIT Press and Center for Computing in the Humanities (CCARH), pp. 1001–1117. Stanford University (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lerdahl, F., Jackendoff, R.: A Generative Theory of Tonal Music. MITP Cambridge, Massachusetts (1983)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cruz-Alcázar, P.P., Vidal-Ruiz, E.: Learning Regular Grammars to Model Musical Style: Comparing Different Coding Schemes. In: Honavar, V.G., Slutzki, G. (eds.) ICGI 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1433, pp. 211–222. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mitzenmacher, M., Owen, S.: Estimating Resemblance of MIDI Documents. In: Buchsbaum, A.L., Snoeyink, J. (eds.) ALENEX 2001. LNCS, vol. 2153, pp. 79–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rizo, D., Iñesta, J.M.: Tree-structured representation of melodies for comparison and retrieval. In: Proc. of the Int.Workshop on Pattern Recognition in the Information Society, pp. 140–155 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Uitdenbogerd, A.L., Zobel, J.: Manipulation of music for melody matching. In: Smith, B., Eelsberg, W. (eds.) Proc. ACM International Multimedia Conference, Bristol, UK, pp. 235–240 (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim, Y.E., Chai, W., Garcia, R., Vercoe, B.: Analysis Of A Contour-Based Representation For Melody. In: Proc. International Symposium on Music Information Retrieval (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Lenguajes y Sistemas InformáticosUniversidad de AlicanteAlicanteSpain

Personalised recommendations