REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by
Mamba-Diffusion Model with Learnable Wavelet for Controllable Symbolic Music Generation
T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read A pianoroll diffusion model with a hybrid Transformer-Mamba U-Net and learnable wavelet transform claims to produce higher-quality, chord-controlled symbolic music than the Polyffusion baseline.
desk verdict A useful architecture paper with a potentially circular chord-control metric and an undefined test split; worth reviewing but the evaluation needs fixing. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The load-bearing mechanism is the denoising U-Net: each encoder and decoder stage uses a Transformer-Mamba block in which features first pass through self-attention and then through a two-branch Mamba selection mechanism, while skip connections run through a Learnable Wavelet Node built from learnable 2D wavelet convolution, depth-wise filtering, and inverse wavelet transform. A self-supervised wavelet loss keeps the learned filters from degenerating into ordinary convolution. Chords are extracted by rule-based methods, encoded by a pretrained chord VAE, injected through cross-attention, and the model is trained with classifier-free guidance so that sampling can steer generation toward a target progression.
What would settle it
Take the released model, condition it on chords labeled by a second independent chord-annotation tool on POP909, and score the generated MIDI with that tool; if chord F1 drops to baseline levels or human listeners cannot reliably identify the target chord progressions, the controllability claim is not about musical chords but about matching that extractor's heuristics.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The core discovery is that combining a Mamba-based selective state-space path with Transformer attention inside a U-Net, and routing skip connections through a learnable wavelet transform, improves both the statistical fidelity and chord-following behavior of diffusion-generated 8-bar pianorolls. The author would state it as: Proffusion-WM, our pianoroll diffusion model with a hybrid Transformer-Mamba block and learnable discrete wavelet transform, outperforms Polyffusion and both ablations on averaged overlapping area, achieves the highest chord control accuracy of 0.541, and receives the highest mean listening ratings across humanness, richness, rhythm, harmony, and overall preference.
Load-bearing premise
The chord-control result depends on the rule-based chord extractor being accurate enough that both the training labels and the evaluation scores reflect real harmonic content.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- The hybrid Transformer-Mamba block can improve global feature modeling in pianoroll diffusion without the quadratic cost of pure self-attention, making longer musical contexts more feasible.
- The learnable wavelet transform in skip connections helps the denoiser preserve sharp onset and offset boundaries, which shows up in higher overlapping-area scores for pitch range and inter-onset interval.
- Chord-conditioned sampling with classifier-free guidance gives users a practical control signal: a target chord progression can steer the generated 8-bar pianoroll, with chord F1 rising from 0.494 for Polyffusion to 0.541 for Proffusion-WM.
- The full model's listening-test ratings suggest that the objective OA and chord F1 gains translate into perceived humanness, harmony, rhythm, and richness.
Reading between the lines
- Because the same rule-based chord extractor builds the conditioning labels and scores the output, the controllability margin may partly reflect the model learning the extractor's heuristics; an independent annotation would separate musical chord-following from extractor mimicry.
- The Transformer-Mamba plus learnable-wavelet U-Net is a generic denoiser, so the recipe could transfer to other image-like generative tasks, such as spectrogram synthesis or MIDI velocity rendering, where sharp high-frequency edges matter.
- A testable extension is to ablate the self-supervised wavelet loss separately from the wavelet transform itself; if the loss alone drives the gains, the transform's role is regularization rather than frequency decomposition.
- The linear-complexity Mamba path may allow the model to scale to longer excerpts than 8 bars, and conditioning on whole-song chord progressions is a natural next experiment.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper presents Proffusion-WM, a diffusion model that generates symbolic music as two-channel pianorolls. The denoising U-Net is augmented with a hybrid Transformer-Mamba block and learnable discrete wavelet transform blocks in the skip connections. Chord conditioning is implemented by extracting beat-wise chords from the training data with a rule-based tool, encoding each 8-bar chord sequence with a pretrained chord VAE, and injecting the resulting latent via cross-attention; classifier-free guidance is used at inference. The method is evaluated on POP909 against Polyffusion and two ablations (with and without wavelet, with and without Mamba) using overlapping-area distribution metrics, Chord F1, and a 30-participant listening test. The authors report that Proffusion-WM achieves the best average OA, the highest Chord F1 (0.541), and the highest ratings on all subjective metrics.
Significance. If the empirical claims are sustained, the paper makes a useful architectural contribution: it is the first application of learnable wavelet transforms to symbolic-music diffusion, it combines Mamba with attention inside a U-Net, and it evaluates the design with both ablations and a blind listening test. The code is released, and the consistent ordering of Proffusion-WM above all baselines on every subjective metric and on most objective metrics is encouraging. The main limitation is that the headline controllability result depends on a single unvalidated chord-extraction pipeline used on both sides of the evaluation, and the objective and subjective comparisons lack inferential statistics; these issues currently prevent the claims from being fully established.
major comments (4)
- [Section III-B and Section V] The chord-controllability claim is supported by Chord F1, but the same rule-based chord extractor [24] is used both to create the conditioning labels in Section III-B and to extract chords from the generated pianorolls in Section V. There is no validation of the extractor's accuracy on POP909, no reconstruction-fidelity check for the pretrained chord VAE, and no human rating of whether generated samples follow the specified chord progressions. Under these conditions, a model that learns the extractor's heuristics can achieve a high F1 without producing progressions a musician would recognize, and the reported peak of 0.541 is not interpretable as "chord control accuracy" without additional evidence. This issue is load-bearing because the controllability half of the central claim rests almost entirely on this metric; the listening-test Harmony rating is not a substitute because it does not measure progression adherence.
- [Section IV-A and Section V] The evaluation population is not defined consistently. Section IV-A states that POP909 is split at song level into 90% training and 10% validation, with no mention of a test set; Section V then says chords are extracted from the "POP909 test set" and that 879 chords are used to generate 879 samples. It is unclear whether the validation set is being reused as the test set, and how the count of 879 arises from a 10% song-level split. This ambiguity affects whether the reported comparisons are genuinely on held-out data and must be resolved for reproducibility.
- [Table I] All objective results are single point estimates. No error bars, confidence intervals, or significance tests are reported for OA or Chord F1, and no information is given about how many generation runs or inference seeds were used. Consequently, the statement in the abstract that the method "significantly outperforms" the baseline is not supported by statistical evidence; differences such as 0.929 vs 0.939 in average OA may lie within sampling variability. Reporting bootstrap intervals over multiple generated sets, or at least a significance test, is necessary before making a comparative claim.
- [Table II and Section IV-D] The listening test used 30 participants and only 12 generated pieces (three per model), and it reports means with standard errors but no inferential statistics. Because the same pieces are rated by multiple participants and the samples are not independent, the claim that Proffusion-WM outperforms all models on all subjective metrics requires at least a repeated-measures comparison or effect-size reporting. As it stands, the subjective ranking cannot be distinguished from rating noise.
minor comments (4)
- [Section IV-A] The two channels of the (2,128,128) pianoroll are never defined; the paper should state whether they represent onset and sustain (as in the Polyffusion baseline) or some other pair of attributes.
- [Equation (15)] The definition of \hat{V}_{\lfloor N/2\rfloor} is unclear ("a vector with a center position value of two"), and the summation index k is not fully specified; please clarify how the wavelet loss is computed in practice and how it prevents the wavelet convolution from degrading into a general convolution.
- [Section V] The sentence "the chords of the generated music pieces align well with those extract from the ground truth" contains a typo ('extract' should be 'extracted'); additionally, the text says "879 ground truth segments" but it should be explicit that these are 8-bar excerpts, not whole songs.
- [Section IV-B] Several hyperparameters needed for reproducibility are missing, including the number of training steps or epochs, model size, and the expansion factor r in the learnable wavelet node; please report these values.
Circularity Check
No circularity: the result is an empirical comparison on held-out data, with the shared chord extractor being a measurement-validity concern rather than a reduction of the derivation to its inputs.
full rationale
The paper's central claims are (i) that Proffusion-WM improves pianoroll quality over Polyffusion and ablations, measured by Overlapping Area and a listening test, and (ii) that it obtains the highest Chord F1 of 0.541. Both are empirical evaluations, not derivations. The denoising network is trained with the standard diffusion variational bound (Eq. 5) plus a self-supervised wavelet loss (Eq. 15); the chord condition is encoded by a pre-trained chord VAE from external work [24] and injected through cross-attention. No parameter is fitted to the test set and no predicted quantity is algebraically identical to a fitted input. The only self-referential element is that the same rule-based chord extractor [24] is used to create the conditioning labels (Section III-B) and to compute Chord F1 (Section V); this can bias the metric if the extractor is noisy, but it is not a circular step because the model is not defined in terms of the evaluator and the comparison is against an external baseline on held-out data. The authors' self-citation [16] appears only in related-work context and is not load-bearing. No uniqueness theorem, no ansatz smuggled in by self-citation, and no renaming of a known result are present. Therefore no circular step can be established from the paper's equations or citations.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (5)
- Guidance scale (w) =
5
- Diffusion steps (T) =
1000
- CFG conditioning dropout probability =
0.2
- Learning rate =
5e-5
- Batch size =
16
assumptions (5)
- standard math The standard DDPM forward and reverse processes (Eqs. 1-5) are valid and the variational lower bound is a correct training objective.
- standard math The Mamba/S4 state-space model with zero-order hold discretization (Eqs. 6-8) provides a correct and efficient sequence model.
- domain assumption The learnable wavelet analysis and synthesis filters, regularized by the self-supervised loss in Eq. 15, produce an invertible decomposition that preserves information across skip connections.
- domain assumption The piano-roll representation with 1/4-beat time steps and pitch range 0-127 captures the music information needed for generation and evaluation.
- domain assumption The rule-based chord extractor and the pretrained chord VAE [24] faithfully encode the chord progressions used for conditioning.
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Mamba-Diffusion Model with Learnable Wavelet for Controllable Symbolic Music Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IZEE2PN7
@misc{pith2026250503314,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Mamba-Diffusion Model with Learnable Wavelet for Controllable Symbolic Music Generation},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IZEE2PN7}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.03314}
}
read the original abstract
The recent surge in the popularity of diffusion models for image synthesis has attracted new attention to their potential for generation tasks in other domains. However, their applications to symbolic music generation remain largely under-explored because symbolic music is typically represented as sequences of discrete events and standard diffusion models are not well-suited for discrete data. We represent symbolic music as image-like pianorolls, facilitating the use of diffusion models for the generation of symbolic music. Moreover, this study introduces a novel diffusion model that incorporates our proposed Transformer-Mamba block and learnable wavelet transform. Classifier-free guidance is utilised to generate symbolic music with target chords. Our evaluation shows that our method achieves compelling results in terms of music quality and controllability, outperforming the strong baseline in pianoroll generation. Our code is available at https://github.com/jinchengzhanggg/proffusion.
Figures
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
MusiChat: Vibe Composing for Music Creation
MusiChat enables iterative, structure-preserving music editing through natural-language conversation by layering an LLM-based interface over a deterministic symbolic music engine.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[24]
Z. Wang, D. Wang, Y . Zhang, and G. Xia, ‘Learning interpretable repre- sentation for controllable polyphonic music generation’, in Proceedings of the 21nd International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference, 2020
work page 2020
-
[1]
P. Dhariwal and A. Nichol, ‘Diffusion models beat GANs on image synthesis’, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2021, pp. 8780–8794
work page 2021
-
[2]
F. Schneider, O. Kamal, Z. Jin, and B. Sch ¨olkopf, ‘Moˆusai: Efficient text- to-music diffusion models’, in Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics , 2024, pp. 8050–8068
work page 2024
-
[3]
Generating symbolic music using diffusion models
[1] L. Atassi, ‘Generating symbolic music using diffusion models’, 2023, arXiv preprint: arXiv:2303.08385
work page Pith review arXiv 2023
- [4]
-
[5]
Z. Wang, L. Min, and G. Xia, ‘Whole-song hierarchical generation of symbolic music using cascaded diffusion models’, in International Conference on Learning Representations , 2024
work page 2024
-
[6]
Y . Huang et al., ‘Symbolic music generation with non-differentiable rule guided diffusion’, in International Conference on Machine Learning , 2024
work page 2024
-
[7]
A. Vaswani et al., ‘Attention is all you need’, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2017
work page 2017
Show all 27 references
-
[8]
Gu and T
A. Gu and T. Dao, ‘Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces’, in COLM, 2024
2024
-
[9]
K. Chen, C. Wang, T. Berg-Kirkpatrick, and S. Dubnov, ‘Music Sketch- Net: Controllable music generation via factorized representations of pitch and rhythm’, in Proceedings of the 21nd International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference , 2020
2020
-
[10]
R. Guo, I. Simpson, C. Kiefer, T. Magnusson, and D. Herremans, ‘MusIAC: An extensible generative framework for music infilling ap- plications with multi-level control’, in Artificial Intelligence in Music, Sound, Art and Design , vol. 13221, 2022, pp. 341–356
2022
-
[11]
Z. Ju et al., ‘TeleMelody: Lyric-to-melody generation with a template- based two-stage method’, in Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Em- pirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , 2022, pp. 5426–5437
2022
-
[12]
Copet et al., ‘Simple and controllable music generation’, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2023
J. Copet et al., ‘Simple and controllable music generation’, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2023
2023
-
[13]
von R ¨utte, L
D. von R ¨utte, L. Biggio, Y . Kilcher, and T. Hofmann, ‘Controllable music generation using learned and expert features’, in International Conference on Learning Representations , 2023
2023
-
[14]
Roberts, J
A. Roberts, J. Engel, C. Raffel, C. Hawthorne, and D. Eck, ‘A hierar- chical latent vector model for learning long-term structure in music’, in Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning , 2018
2018
-
[15]
L. Min, J. Jiang, G. Xia, and J. Zhao, ‘Polyffusion: A diffusion model for polyphonic score generation with internal and external controls’, in ISMIR, 2023
2023
-
[16]
Zhang, G
J. Zhang, G. Fazekas, and C. Saitis, ‘Composer style-specific symbolic music generation using vector quantized discrete diffusion models’, in IEEE 34th International Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing, 2024
2024
-
[17]
Ronneberger, P
O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox, ‘U-Net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation’, in Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, vol. 9351, 2015, pp. 234–241
2015
-
[18]
Ho and T
J. Ho and T. Salimans, ‘Classifier-free diffusion guidance’, in NeurIPS Workshop on Deep Generative Models and Downstream Applications , 2021
2021
-
[19]
K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, ‘Deep residual learning for image recognition’, in IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2016, pp. 770–778
2016
-
[20]
Hendrycks and K
D. Hendrycks and K. Gimpel, ‘Gaussian error linear units (GELUs)’, 2016, arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.08415
2016 arXiv
-
[21]
Hwang, D
S. Hwang, D. Han, C. Jung, and M. Jeon, ‘WaveDH: Wavelet sub-bands guided convNet for efficient image dehazing’, 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.01604
2024 arXiv
-
[22]
X. Gao et al., ‘Efficient multi-scale network with learnable discrete wavelet transform for blind motion deblurring’, in IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 2733–2742
2024
-
[23]
L. Chen, X. Chu, X. Zhang, and J. Sun, ‘Simple baselines for image restoration’, in European Conference on Computer Vision, 2022, pp. 17-33
2022
-
[25]
Wang et al., ‘Pop909: A pop-song dataset for music arrangement generation’, in Proceedings of the 21nd International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference , 2020
Z. Wang et al., ‘Pop909: A pop-song dataset for music arrangement generation’, in Proceedings of the 21nd International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference , 2020
2020
-
[26]
K. Choi, C. Hawthorne, I. Simon, M. Dinculescu, and J. Engel, ‘En- coding musical style with transformer autoencoders’, in International Conference on Machine Learning, 2020, pp. 1899-1908
2020
-
[27]
Phung, Q
H. Phung, Q. Dao, and A. Tran, ‘Wavelet diffusion models are fast and scalable image generators’, in IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023, pp. 10199–10208
2023
Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.