Music Teaching Feedback Based on Error Cause and Performance History

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing teaching systems for musical instruments provide the same evaluation for the same performance error, failing to account for varying causes of errors, making practical teaching difficult.

Innovation Solution

A teaching device that acquires reference and performance data, detects errors, estimates their causes based on performance history, and determines personalized instruction content items based on error frequency and cause.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If the same evaluation result is presented for the same performance error, then the teaching system is simple and easy to operate, but the teaching effectiveness deteriorates because it cannot account for varying causes of errors

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesimplicity of evaluation systemVSAvoidteaching effectiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The evaluation system dynamically adjusts the evaluation result based on the detected cause of the performance error. Instead of presenting the same static evaluation for identical errors, the system modifies the evaluation content according to the specific cause (e.g., rhythm issue vs. pitch issue), thereby resolving the contradiction between simplicity and effectiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameter of evaluation result presentation based on the error cause. By introducing a variable dimension (cause-based differentiation) to the evaluation output, the system maintains operational simplicity while improving teaching effectiveness through personalized feedback.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If personalized instruction content is determined based on error cause and frequency, then teaching effectiveness is improved, but device complexity increases due to additional processing steps

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveteaching effectivenessVSAvoidcomplexity of instruction determination system
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The instruction determination process is segmented into distinct stages: error detection, cause estimation, and instruction content determination. This segmentation allows each stage to handle specific tasks independently, reducing the overall complexity by breaking down the personalized instruction generation into manageable modules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback from performance history to estimate error causes and determine instruction content. By using feedback mechanisms, the system can leverage existing data patterns to simplify the decision-making process, reducing complexity while maintaining high teaching effectiveness through adaptive instruction selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS20260024460A1Teaching device, teaching method, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing teaching processing program
Publication Date: 2026.01.22 YAMAHA CORP
  • US20260024460A1 patent drawing
  • US20260024460A1 patent drawing
  • US20260024460A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A teaching device includes a controller including memory storing instructions and at least one processor that implements the instructions. The instructions include acquiring reference data indicating a time series of reference sounds. The instructions include acquiring performance data indicating a time series of sounds expressed by a user's performance. The instructions include detecting a performance error by comparing the reference data and the performance data. The instructions include estimating a cause of the error based on performance history. The instructions include determining an instruction content item based on frequency of the error and the cause.