Human–Machine Co-Creation

All research ONGOING RESEARCH

Studies in human–machine co-creative collaborations

HUMAN–MACHINE
CO-CREATION

Project description

When two musicians improvise together, each listens and responds while forming expectations about how the other’s timing, phrasing, and expressive gestures will unfold. Most of these expectations come from the sound itself and from knowing a partner’s playing; body movement adds cues, especially when timing is uncertain. Two research areas have explored this largely separately. At IRCAM (the Institute for Research and Coordination in Acoustics/Music, a Paris-based center for music research and creation), co-improvisation systems such as Somax2 and Dicy2 respond to musicians mainly by listening to their audio or MIDI. Research on multimodal performance shows that musicians’ movements carry information about timing and interaction. This project brings the two together, asking whether performer-specific models of physiological and movement data improve a computational partner’s anticipation beyond audio and MIDI alone.

We synchronize audio, MIDI, MIDI Polyphonic Expression when available, gesture and motion capture, facial measurements, EEG (brain activity), and EMG (muscle activity). Models trained on each performer’s recordings predict pauses, phrase changes, and shifts in intensity using only data recorded before each event, so they can run live. The system responds over MIDI, including through a Steinway Spirio self-playing piano, and records the performer’s reaction, closing a feedback loop.

Proposed closed-loop architecture

The performer improvises using a MIDI-capable instrument. Audio and selected bodily signals provide complementary observations.

Research team

CEMA · Bowdoin College

Student researcher

Jintae Park

Bowdoin College

Student researcher

Shahd Hekal

Bowdoin College

Student researcher

Johann Ocampo

Bowdoin College

Background

Improvisation involves
learning your partner.

Musicians develop expectations through shared experience. They anticipate timing, phrasing, and gesture—and revise those expectations as the music changes. We take this flexible anticipation as a design principle for a creative AI partner.

01

Learn a performer

Build from an individual’s own playing and embodied practice.

02

Anticipate possibilities

Form useful expectations while remaining open to surprise.

03

Create together

Support, complement, contrast, or leave space for the musician.

The artistic motivation

This research grows from Badie Khaleghian’s work across composition, improvisation, responsive media, and brain–computer interfaces. The aim is to design a partner whose musical behavior develops from a particular performer’s practice, with the performer shaping the data, the musical vocabulary, and the terms of the interaction.

Explore Badie’s creative research

Why this research belongs at CEMA

CEMA brings teaching, rehearsal, research, and performance into the same environment. Its spatial sound, immersive projection, instruments, and computing systems support repeated experiments in which sensing, analysis, and artistic response can be developed together.

Record in practiceTest a responseRehearse & refine

The same setting lets students investigate the technical system and its musical consequences.

Explore the studio and resources

Research precedents

Dicy2 · IRCAM

Learning musical vocabulary and interaction through improvisation, with reactive and planned generation. Developed from the DYCI2 research project.

Official project page

Somax2 · IRCAM

Live co-improvisation shaped by machine listening and a musical corpus chosen by the user.

Official project page

jam_bot · MIT Media Lab

A real-time improvisation system developed with Jordan Rudess and fine-tuned on his performances.

Official project page

CEMA’s question: what can synchronized musical, bodily, and physiological signals add to a personalized creative partnership? These projects provide context; they are not CEMA collaborators.

Goals

From personal data
to a creative partner.

Our central question is whether additional performance signals improve anticipation and musical interaction beyond an audio-and-MIDI baseline.

Explore the proposed inputs

Select a signal to see what it records and what we need to test.

Audio

What it records
The sounding performance: timing, dynamics, timbre, and musical texture.
Research question
Which audible changes help anticipate the next musical event?
What we need to test
Verify recording and replay, and measure alignment with instrument events.

Personal dataset

Record & align

Capture repeatable sessions. Preserve timestamps, assess signal quality, and annotate musical events.

Personalized AI

Model & evaluate

Define prediction tasks, learn performer-specific relationships, and test on held-out sessions.

Musical interaction

Generate & listen

Use predictions to inform a partner’s musical choices. Evaluate the experience with performers.

Instrument compatibility: MIDI, MPE, and Steinway Spirio

The architecture is designed around MIDI rather than a specific keyboard. An instrument or controller that transmits MIDI can supply note and control data. An instrument that receives MIDI can perform generated output; this includes synthesizers, software instruments, and a suitably connected Steinway Spirio player piano.

MPE is an optional source of additional expression data. Standard MIDI instruments can participate without it. Each configuration requires verification of its supported messages, routing, and latency; this is an intended general interface, not a claim that every instrument has already been tested.

What “personal” means here

A personal research dataset contains synchronized recordings of a performer’s musical and bodily activity. A personal musical corpus contains selected audio or MIDI material that can supply a generative system’s vocabulary. They serve different purposes and may be connected in the eventual system.

The proposed design gives the performer a role in choosing the material, defining useful musical behavior, and evaluating how the partner responds.

Aimed outcomes

Artistic and scientific
outcomes.

The intended outcomes combine artistic performance, a working research system, and documented methods that others can examine and build on.

Featured artistic outcome · in development

NEURAL
DUET

Badie Khaleghian and a computational musical partner performing through a Steinway Spirio player piano.

22 MAY 2027 · 7:30 P.M.

Third Angle New Music
The Vault Theater · Hillsboro, Oregon

Presented by Third Angle New Music in the Portland metropolitan area.

The performance aims to connect a personal dataset of improvisation and EEG with an AI model whose musical responses are realized through the Spirio’s MIDI connection.

Third Angle’s project page

Artistic

An improvising co-creator

A partner that can contribute musically while leaving meaningful choices with the performer.

Technical

A reusable research system

A synchronized recorder, personal pilot datasets, predictive models, and a real-time interaction prototype.

Research

Evidence & documentation

Comparisons, performance studies, papers, and methods or code suitable for sharing, with appropriate permissions.

These are intended outcomes. The current project has not yet established that additional modalities improve prediction or artistic interaction.

Application

Closing the biofeedback loop.

Physiological measurements inform a musical response. The performer hears it, responds, and is measured again. This creates a way to study how sound, bodily activity, and creative decisions influence one another over time.

What would we test?

Timing
Are the measurements and responses aligned with the performance?

Contribution
Does adding a signal improve prediction over the musical baseline?

Experience
Does the performer find the response useful, coherent, and open to influence?

Biofeedback, adaptation, and research limits

In the adaptive condition, measured activity changes the system’s response. A fixed-playback comparison removes that dependency while preserving an audible stimulus. Recording both sides helps examine feedback effects; observed relationships alone do not establish causation.

Updating predictions during a performance is distinct from retraining model weights online. EEG and EMG are measurements requiring interpretation and quality checks, not direct readings of intention or emotion. Clinical applications would require separate studies; this project currently concerns artistic interaction and research methods.