= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vaniver comments on AlphaGo versus Lee Sedol - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (183)
Emily Howell?
I was thinking more like these examples:
https://ericye16.com/music-rnn/
http://www.hexahedria.com/2015/08/03/composing-music-with-recurrent-neural-networks/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VTI1BBLydE
https://highnoongmt.wordpress.com/2015/05/22/lisls-stis-recurrent-neural-networks-for-folk-music-generation/
I think what Vaniver means is: It seems that Emily Howell works pretty damn well, contrary to your claim that nothing does. (By, so far as I understand, means very different from any sort of neural network.)
I know the conversation here has run its course, but I just wanted to add: whether or not Emily Howell is seen as something that "works really well" as an automated system is probably up for debate. It seems to require quite a bit of input from Cope himself in order to come up with sensible, interesting music. For example, one of the most popular pieces from Emily Howell is this fugue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLR-_c_uCwI - we really don't know how much influence Cope had in creating this piece of music, because the process of composition was not transparent at all.