Search

Although the automatic identification of the optimal fingering for the performance of melodies on fretted string instruments has already been addressed (at least partially) in the literature, the specific case regarding lead electric guitar requires a dedicated approach. We propose a system that can generate, from simple MIDI melodies, tablatures enriched by fingerings, articulations, and expressive techniques. The basic fingering is derived by solving a constrained and multi-attribute optimization problem, which derives the best position of the fretting hand, not just the finger used at each moment.Then, by analyzing statistical data from the mySongBook corpus, the most common clich{\'e}s and biomechanical feasibility, articulations, and expressive techniques are introduced. Finally, the obtained output is converted into MusicXML format, which allows for easy visualization and use. The quality of the tablatures derived and the high configurability of the proposed approach can have several impacts, in particular in the fields of instrumental teaching, assisted composition and arranging, and computational expressive music performance models.

Language Models (LMs) have been shown to inherit undesired biases that might hurt minorities and underrepresented groups if such systems were integrated into real-world applications without careful fairness auditing. This paper proposes FairBelief, an analytical approach to capture and assess beliefs, i.e., propositions that an LM may embed with different degrees of confidence and that covertly influence its predictions. With FairBelief, we leverage prompting to study the behavior of several state-of-the-art LMs across different previously neglected axes, such as model scale and likelihood, assessing predictions on a fairness dataset specifically designed to quantify LMs' outputs' hurtfulness. Finally, we conclude with an in-depth qualitative assessment of the beliefs emitted by the models. We apply FairBelief to English LMs, revealing that, although these architectures enable high performances on diverse natural language processing tasks, they show hurtful beliefs about specific genders. Interestingly, training procedure and dataset, model scale, and architecture induce beliefs of different degrees of hurtfulness.

While the impact of social biases in language models has been recognized, prior methods for bias evaluation have been limited to binary association tests on small datasets, limiting our understanding of bias complexities. This paper proposes a novel framework for probing language models for social biases by assessing disparate treatment, which involves treating individuals differently according to their affiliation with a sensitive demographic group. We curate SOFA, a large-scale benchmark designed to address the limitations of existing fairness collections. SOFA expands the analysis beyond the binary comparison of stereotypical versus anti-stereotypical identities to include a diverse range of identities and stereotypes. Comparing our methodology with existing benchmarks, we reveal that biases within language models are more nuanced than acknowledged, indicating a broader scope of encoded biases than previously recognized. Benchmarking LMs on SOFA, we expose how identities expressing different religions lead to the most pronounced disparate treatments across all models. Finally, our findings indicate that real-life adversities faced by various groups such as women and people with disabilities are mirrored in the behavior of these models.