{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.011406844106463879, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015209125475285171, 'mean_word_length': 5.030534351145038, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluating automatically estimated chord sequences

In this paper, we perform an in-depth evaluation of a large number of algorithms for chord estimation that have been submitted to the MIREX competitions in 2010, 2011 and 2012. Therefore we first present a rigorous scheme to describe evaluation methods in a sound, unambiguous way that extends previous work specifically to take into account the large variance in chord estimation vocabularies and to perform evaluations on select sets of chords. Then we take a look at the evaluation metrics used so far and propose some alternative ones. Finally, we use these different methods to get a deeper insight into the strengths of each of the competing algorithms and show that the choice of evaluation measure greatly influences the ranking.