ArticleScientific reports2025
Advancing deep learning for expressive music composition and performance modeling.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-source music knowledge graph construction and prosodic evolution trajectory prediction via DRL-VAE collaborative learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A study on the emotional accuracy of generative AI music from the perspective of the "Emotion Wheel" theory.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Cognitive encoding modeling of musical sequences for vocal performance and intelligent music composition.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Expressive coupling and textural dissociation in classical piano performance: evidence from the ASAP dataset.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Adaptive teaching assistance model combining generative AI and big data analytics.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pursuit of expressive and human-like music generation remains a significant challenge in the field of artificial intelligence (AI). While deep learning has advanced AI music composition and transcription, current models often struggle with long-term structural coherence and emotional nuance. This study presents a comparative analysis of three leading deep learning architectures: Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks, Transformer models, and Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), for AI-generated music composition and transcription using the MAESTRO dataset. Our key innovation lies in the integration of a dual evaluation framework that combines objective metrics (perplexity, harmonic consistency, and rhythmic entropy) with subjective human evaluations via a Mean Opinion Score (MOS) study involving 50 listeners. The Transformer model achieved the best overall performance (perplexity: 2.87, harmonic consistency: 79.4%, MOS: 4.3), indicating its superior ability to produce musically rich and expressive outputs. However, human compositions remained highest in perceptual quality (MOS: 4.8). Our findings provide a benchmarking foundation for future AI music systems and emphasize the need for emotion-aware modeling, real-time human-AI collaboration, and reinforcement learning to bridge the gap between machine-generated and human-performed music.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.