AN EXPECTATION-BASED MODEL FOR MEASURING AND VISUALISING COMPOSITIONAL VARIABILITY

DR CHRISTIAN BENVENUTI
Contact: cbenvenuti@gmail.com
KARL-FRANZENS-UNIVERSITÄT GRAZ Postgraduate Programme in Music, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul

BACKGROUND Compositional variability is not only a function of entropy – it also depends on how musical materials are
Compositional variability refers to the dispersion (spread) of musical spread in time.
materials deployed over time and it often helps identifying cardinal
points in a piece. Shannon entropy, which has traditionally been used
as a general measure of ‘freedom of choice’ (Margulis & Beatty, 2008;
Youngblood, 1958), provides an average of information without
considering the ordering of the materials. An ideal method would
assume variability to be high when neither repetition or variety are HIGH entropy, LOW variability LOW entropy, LOW variability Surprising flow, HIGH variability
excessive. It is hypothesised that compositional variability across The overall graph doesn’t
corpora of sufficient sizes might indicate meaningful trends in tell much, except that this
Example 1: PC entropy variation of J. S. Bach’s Prelude and Fugue in C Major, BWV 846
comparative studies. 3.5 final value is the ‘entropy H
3
of the piece’
2.5

Bits
1.5 Shannon Entropy
1

AIMS 0.5

The aims of this study are to propose an expectation-based 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

mathematical model for measuring and visualising compositional Bar Number

variability. Entropy H

Example 2: Time-Weighted Entropy Difference of Bach’s Prelude

METHOD 7

An algorithm was developed to extract pitch-classes (PC) from a corpus 5

4
Clearly structured
comprising all piano sonatas by Beethoven and all solo piano pieces Bits
3

2
variability, distinct change
published in life by Chopin. The extracted data was then processed in 1

0
at every bar. Peaks in
accordance with a time-weighted entropy difference (TWED) model -1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
dynamic surprise are clear.
Bar Number
consisting of calculating the difference, weighted according to a
Entropy H Time-Weighted Entropy Difference ΔH
chronological criterion, between consecutive Shannon entropy states
across a piece on a two-dimensional time-information space. Example 3: Time-Weighted Entropy Difference of a random sequence of same size as the Prelude
Expectations about future events are then modelled by TWED as the 7

music unfolds, taking into account the overall cognitive framework of 6

5
Unstructured (random)
sequence. Low variability &
Bits

4
statistical learning and musical expectancy, for which there is empirical 3
2
dynamic surprise
support (Daikoku, Yatomi, & Yumoto, 2016; Huron & Margulis, 2010). 1
0
throughout.
The result is a 1-gram sequence which can be plotted as a -1

1 17 33 49 65 81 97 113 129 145 161 177 193 209 225 241 257 273 289 305 321 337 353 369 385 401 417 433 449 465 481 497 513

representation of dynamic surprise. Event Time-Weighted Entropy

Time-Weighted Entropy Difference ∆H Difference

Example 4: PC Variability (TWED variance) measured for different works

Bach’s Prelude BWV 846 1.388
Beethoven's Piano Sonata Sonata 13 Op. 27, 3rd mov. 1.571
Beethoven's Piano Sonata Sonata 29 Op. 106, 4a 0.294 By calculating the variance of the sequence, it is possible to obtain a statistical TWED Variance
Chopin’s 24 Preludes Op. 28, No. 15 2.105 measure of PC-related variability for the work, which can then be compared with the
Chopin's 2 Nocturnes Op. 37, No. 2 0.271
measures obtained from other works.
0 0.55 1.1 1.65 2.2

RESULTS Corpus
The application of the model to the corpus [see table on the right] Works Movements Sample Size
showed remarkable differences and similarities between composers. L. V. Beethoven The 32 piano sonatas 103 333,075 notes
For instance, results showed wider range of both entropy and F. Chopin The complete piano solo works published in life 152 331,839 notes
compositional variability in Chopin’s collection; Chopin’s average
variability was also found to be significantly higher than Beethoven’s; in Beethoven - Variability Average (chronologically) Chopin - Variability Average (chronologically)
both collections, it was found that variability descends to the lowest 1829
Youthful popularity The years of stress
levels toward the last phases of the composers’ creative careers. 1.2 1.2
1825 1830 1831 1832 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1842 1843 1844 1846 1847
The eighteenth-century The years of mastery The last sonatas
Furthermore, variability has an overall downward trend in the corpus. sonatas
The Heiligenstadt Testament
1826 1833
1841 1845
1802

Max, Min, and Average entropy values in both collections

3.6
3.5
Average Variability

Average Variability

3.4
3.3
Entropy (bits)

μ=3.245 μ=3.265
3.2
3.1
3
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.5

Beethoven Chopin
Max, Min, and Average variability values in both collections 0.7
Time
0.7

15 per. Mov. Avg. (Variability per movement/piece) Linear (Variability per movement/piece) Time Line Linear (Variability per movement/piece) 15 per. Mov. Avg. (Variability per movement/piece)

1.6
Beethoven - Correlation between entropy and variability Chopin - Correlation between entropy and variability
TWED (bits)

2.5 2.5

1.2

μ=0.945 μ=0.960
0.8 24 Preludes Op. 28, 15

2 2
24 Preludes Op. 28, 6
0.4
24 Preludes Op. 28, No. 3 24 Preludes Op. 28, 2

0 24 Preludes Op. 28, 24

Sonata 13 Op. 27, 3 24 Preludes Op. 28, No. 15
Beethoven Chopin 1.5
Sonata no. 14, 3
1.5
24 Preludes Op. 28, 10

Beethoven - variability oscillation between movements 24 Preludes Op. 28, 9

Variability
Variability

24 Preludes Op. 28, 11

Sonata 18 Op. 31, 3 24 Preludes Op. 28, No. 9
1.6

1.4 1 Sonata 23 Op. 57, 2 1 24 Preludes Op. 28, 23 24 Preludes Op. 28, No. 6

24 Preludes Op. 28, 3

1.2
24 Preludes Op. 28, No. 24
Sonata no. 14, 2
TWED (bits)

1 0.5
Sonata 10 Op. 14, 3 0.5

Sonata no. 14, 1

0.8 Sonata no. 14, 4
Sonata 29 Op. 106, 4a 24 Preludes Op. 28, No. 2

0.6
0 0
2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5

0.4
Entropy Entropy

0.2 Works are connected through lines chronologically. Notable dissidents are captioned.
Pieces are colour-coded chronologically: late works are darker

Daikoku, T., Yatomi, Y., & Yumoto, M. (2016). Pitch-class distribution modulates
the statistical learning of atonal chord sequences. Brain and Cognition, 108, 1–10.
CONCLUSIONS Huron, D. B., & Margulis, E. H. (2010). Musical Expectancy and Thrills. In P. N.
PC-related variability was generally high in rondo movements, confirming the assumption that the Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of Music and Emotion: Theory, research,
alternation between repetition (the refrain) and variety (modulating episodes) is a good conduit for applications (pp. 575–604). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
variability. The fall of variability in both composers is chronologically correlated with the worsening of Margulis, E. H., & Beatty, A. P. (2008). Musical style, psychoaesthetics, and
their health problems. Chronological correlations between entropy and variability suggest that in prospects for entropy as an analytic tool. Computer Music Journal, 32(4), 64–78.
their very early periods they generally avoided radical departures from tradition. Higher entropy and Youngblood, J. (1958). Style as information. Journal of Music Theory, 2(1), 24–35.
variability average and wider variability range seem to be connected to Chopin’s chromaticism and
richer variety of genres. While chronological correlations are preliminary and merit further
investigation, the results demonstrate that the TWED model can provide meaningful structural
information, assisting corpus-based musicology in analytical studies.