-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 207
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Key evaluation updates #396
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
… each error category so new files have been added to the detection folder.
…aluation class uses exactly the same error_scores
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #396 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 94.6% 94.65% +0.04%
==========================================
Files 93 93
Lines 15078 15197 +119
==========================================
+ Hits 14265 14384 +119
Misses 813 813
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Hi @fdlm (or @superbock), Would you mind having a look at this PR ? It should be quick :) It does preserve previous behaviour and adds functionalities that can be useful to other researchers interested in musical key detection evaluation. If there are changes you think are needed I would be happy to discuss. Cheers, Thanks ! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for your work and sorry for the late reply. Your PR looks good, I'd like to request just some minor changes, then we're ready to go!
madmom/evaluation/key.py
Outdated
'Relative: {:.3f} Parallel: {:.3f} Other: {:.3f}'.format( | ||
self.name, self.weighted, self.correct, self.fifth, | ||
self.relative, self.parallel, self.other)) | ||
'Relative: {:.3f} Relative of Fifth: {:.3f} ' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should only report "Relative of Fifth" here if it is actually present in all the evaluation objects.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK
What's the status of this PR? I'm preparing v0.17 and wonder if this is ready to be included. |
I guess I have missed the v0.17 release boat, sorry ... it should be done today (Montreal time zone). |
No hurry, there's still some more time until the release will be ready. I was just wondering abot the current status. |
OK, cool. I'll still try to aim for finishing this today :)
Bertrand Scherrer, Ph.D.
Audio Research Scientist
LANDR Audio Inc.
160 St Viateur East, Suite 809
Montreal, QC, Canada, H2T 1A8
www.landr.com
…On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 9:30 AM Sebastian Böck ***@***.***> wrote:
No hurry, there's still some more time until the release will be ready. I
was just wondering abot the current status.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#396?email_source=notifications&email_token=ADPHIF3WLBRYKJIUY3JPUY3QQLYGNA5CNFSM4GHRDVH2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOECILKMI#issuecomment-546354481>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADPHIF562DRCPFOS2IBW2E3QQLYGNANCNFSM4GHRDVHQ>
.
|
…is actually present in evaluation objects
@superbock and @fdlm all should be good now. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good work! Looking forward to having this merged. Just two comments to polish the code until we can include it.
Also, we should squash some of the commits before/when merging this.
Ok, v0.17 was delayed a bit ;), but I'm currently working on getting a new version out, so I'd like to check back on this PR and its current status. @bscherrer can you comment on the two comments above? Would be really nice to have this in! |
Hi @superbock, I will get this done this week or next. Is that OK timewise ? |
…ding relative of fifth error score
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking good, thanks!
You have successfully added a new CodeQL configuration |
separate identification of key error category and score computation: error_scores are now a class variable of the KeyEvaluation class
addition of a new type of error category: relative_of_fifth that plays well with the strict_fifth option
additional documentation for the error_type function
updates to the key evaluation test code and data files to account for the separation of the error category determination and the score to attribute to a given key error
This pull request fixes #395 .