Proceedings of the 22nd Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the Web 2016
DOI: 10.1145/2976796.2988171
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Deep Approach for Handwritten Musical Symbols Recognition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Experimental results showed that even without post-processing, this approach outperformed many traditional methods. Pinheiro et al [37] used ConvNets for note recognition and compared it with classic networks like LeNet, AlexNet, and GoogleNet, with GoogleNet showing the best performance in note recognition. Rebelo et al [18] were the first to introduce neural networks in the note classification stage, laying the foundation for further research.…”
Section: B Deep Learning-based Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Experimental results showed that even without post-processing, this approach outperformed many traditional methods. Pinheiro et al [37] used ConvNets for note recognition and compared it with classic networks like LeNet, AlexNet, and GoogleNet, with GoogleNet showing the best performance in note recognition. Rebelo et al [18] were the first to introduce neural networks in the note classification stage, laying the foundation for further research.…”
Section: B Deep Learning-based Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This makes most research that uses custom CNN architecture have difficulty beating the OMR research that uses official CNN architecture. An example can be seen from the previously mentioned research where the research with the HOMUS dataset gets 96.01% accuracy by using GoogleNet [11] which is bigger than the one that uses custom architecture which gets 95.56% accuracy [21]. It is proven more with the research that uses a lesser amount of data and classes but has quite low accuracy which is 80% [22] if compared to the research that uses GoogleNet [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…An example can be seen from the previously mentioned research where the research with the HOMUS dataset gets 96.01% accuracy by using GoogleNet [11] which is bigger than the one that uses custom architecture which gets 95.56% accuracy [21]. It is proven more with the research that uses a lesser amount of data and classes but has quite low accuracy which is 80% [22] if compared to the research that uses GoogleNet [11]. Based on this information, it is better to try the currently developed CNN architecture that has been available and has proven good in another research field.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experimental results show that the effect is superior to most traditional methods, even when no postprocessing is used. Pinheiro et al [ 4 ] compared CNNs to the classical deep learning networks for note recognition tasks. Rebelo et al [ 2 ] used neural networks for the first time in the note classification stage, comparing them to SVM and other models; while the results were not favorable, they laid the groundwork for future research.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%