DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS(s)) submitted on 9/1/2023, 2/28/2025, and 5/20/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In ¶0019, “ROM 13” should read, “ROM 103.”
In ¶0026, “a corporation of the CPU 101 and the GPU 102” should read, “an incorporation of the CPU 101 and the GPU 102.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informality: In line 2, "included" should read, "includes."
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Kobayashi ("[CCLab 20 Autumn] Trends and Practices in Music and Human-Computer Interaction Research," January 30, 2021, retrieved from the application file wrapper).
Regarding claim 1, Kobayashi discloses an information processing device comprising: at least one processor configured to execute a plurality of modules including an input module (Kobayashi p. 8: "using your smartphone, the parameters of the guitar effects in your DTM software are automatically set to produce a sound that matches that description") into which natural language that includes an adjective (Kobayashi p. 11: "To build a model for predicting effect parameters, we analyzed approximately 5,200 review texts from an electric guitar equipment sales website and extracted approximately 200 phrases describing tone quality by pattern extraction using part-of-speech patterns and dependency analysis." Phrases that describe tone quality are adjectival.) is configured to be input by a user (Kobayashi p. 8: "using your smartphone, the parameters of the guitar effects in your DTM software are automatically set to produce a sound that matches that description"), and a timbre estimation module configured to output timbre data based on the natural language input by the user (Kobayashi p. 8: "we developed Linguitone, a system that supports sound creation by focusing on the linguistic expression patterns of timbre-descriptive phrases and using a model that predicts guitar effect parameters from embedding vectors of natural language."), by using a trained model configured to output the timbre data from the adjective (Kobayashi p. 12: "After that, the author and two guitar annotators created and expanded the data, creating a total of 311 training datasets. We used multiple distributed representation methods and machine learning to build predictive models for the data and compared them.").
Regarding claim 2, Kobayashi discloses an information processing device comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Kobayashi further discloses that the timbre estimation module is configured to output a plurality of pieces of the timbre data, and the at least one processor is configured to execute the plurality of modules further including a presentation module configured to present the plurality of pieces of the timbre data to the user as timbre data candidates to be selected by the user (Kobayashi user interface figure, translated below, discloses a presentation module configured to present the plurality of pieces of timbre data to the user as candidates, in the middle-top figure.).
PNG
media_image1.png
864
720
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Kobayashi discloses a control method realized by a computer, the control method comprising: acquiring natural language that includes an adjective (Kobayashi p. 11: "To build a model for predicting effect parameters, we analyzed approximately 5,200 review texts from an electric guitar equipment sales website and extracted approximately 200 phrases describing tone quality by pattern extraction using part-of-speech patterns and dependency analysis." Phrases that describe tone quality are adjectival.) and is input by a user (Kobayashi p. 8: "using your smartphone, the parameters of the guitar effects in your DTM software are automatically set to produce a sound that matches that description"); and outputting timbre data based on the natural language input by the user (Kobayashi p. 8: "we developed Linguitone, a system that supports sound creation by focusing on the linguistic expression patterns of timbre-descriptive phrases and using a model that predicts guitar effect parameters from embedding vectors of natural language."), by using a trained model configured to output the timbre data from the adjective (Kobayashi p. 12: "After that, the author and two guitar annotators created and expanded the data, creating a total of 311 training datasets. We used multiple distributed representation methods and machine learning to build predictive models for the data and compared them.").
Regarding claim 12, Kobayashi discloses a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 11 as discussed above.
Kobayashi further discloses that in the outputting of the timbre data, a plurality of pieces of the timbre data are output, and the control method further comprises presenting the plurality of pieces of the timbre data to the user as timbre data candidates to be selected by the user (Kobayashi user interface figure, translated above, discloses a presentation module configured to present the plurality of pieces of timbre data to the user as candidates, in the middle-top figure.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3-6 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Usa et al. (JP H09325773 A, December 16, 1997), hereinafter Usa.
Regarding claim 3, Kobayashi discloses an information processing device comprising the features of claim 2 as discussed above.
Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose that the presentation module is configured to sound the timbre data candidates.
However, Usa teaches that the presentation module is configured to sound the timbre data candidates (Usa ¶0020: "The user moves the cursor using the cursor switches 90 and 91, and then operates the listening switch 92 to play the sound corresponding to the timbre where the cursor is located via the sound system 2A. Alternatively, when the listening switch 92 is operated, the sound of the currently displayed tone on the display unit 97 may be played in sequence. A message is displayed on the display unit 97 indicating whether there is a preferred tone among the played tones.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kobayashi by sounding the candidates as in Usa to allow beginners and general users who are unfamiliar with parameters to easily select a desired tone (Usa ¶0003).
Regarding claim 4, Kobayashi (in view of Usa) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 3 as discussed above.
Kobayashi further teaches that each of the timbre data candidates includes at least one of waveform data, an effect parameter, or both (Kobayashi user interface figure, translated above, teaches a presentation module configured with an effect parameter for each piece of timbre data, in the middle-top figure.).
Regarding claim 5, Kobayashi (in view of Usa) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 4 as discussed above.
Usa further teaches that each of the timbre data candidates is a timbre dataset including the waveform data and the effect parameter (Usa ¶0008: "In addition to these methods, other methods may be employed, such as a harmonic synthesis method that synthesizes musical waveforms by adding multiple harmonics to a fundamental wave, a formant synthesis method that synthesizes musical waveforms using formant waveforms with a specific spectral distribution, and an analog synthesizer method using a VCO, VCF, and VCA.").
Regarding claim 6, Kobayashi (in view of Usa) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 4 as discussed above.
Kobayashi further teaches that each of the timbre data candidates includes only the effect parameter (Kobayashi user interface figure, translated above, teaches a presentation module configured with an effect parameter for each piece of timbre data, in the middle-top figure.).
Usa further teaches that the presentation module is configured to generate a sound by combining the effect parameter (Usa ¶0001: "This invention relates to a tone selection device that selects a predetermined tone from among sound source devices mounted on electronic musical instruments and the like, and a tone adjustment device that adjusts the parameters of the selected tone.") with default waveform data (Usa ¶0008: "Here, the waveform memory method sequentially reads out sample value data of musical tone waveforms stored in the waveform memory according to address data that changes in accordance with the pitch of the musical tone to be generated.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kobayashi by sounding the candidates as in Usa to easily adjust the parameters of a tone selected from a large number of tones spanning multiple sound sources to achieve a desired tone (Usa ¶0003).
Regarding claim 13, Kobayashi discloses a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 12 as discussed above.
Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose that the timbre data candidates are sounded in the presenting of the plurality of pieces of the timbre data.
However, Usa teaches that the timbre data candidates are sounded in the presenting of the plurality of pieces of the timbre data (Usa ¶0020: "The user moves the cursor using the cursor switches 90 and 91, and then operates the listening switch 92 to play the sound corresponding to the timbre where the cursor is located via the sound system 2A. Alternatively, when the listening switch 92 is operated, the sound of the currently displayed tone on the display unit 97 may be played in sequence. A message is displayed on the display unit 97 indicating whether there is a preferred tone among the played tones.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control method realized by a computer of Kobayashi by sounding the candidates as in Usa to allow beginners and general users who are unfamiliar with parameters to easily select a desired tone (Usa ¶0003).
Regarding claim 14, Kobayashi (in view of Usa) teaches a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 13 as discussed above.
Kobayashi further teaches that each of the timbre data candidates includes at least one of waveform data, an effect parameter, or both (Kobayashi user interface figure, translated above, teaches a presentation module configured with an effect parameter for each piece of timbre data, in the middle-top figure.).
Regarding claim 15, Kobayashi (in view of Usa) teaches a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 14 as discussed above.
Usa further teaches that each of the timbre data candidates is a timbre dataset including the waveform data and the effect parameter (Usa ¶0008: "In addition to these methods, other methods may be employed, such as a harmonic synthesis method that synthesizes musical waveforms by adding multiple harmonics to a fundamental wave, a formant synthesis method that synthesizes musical waveforms using formant waveforms with a specific spectral distribution, and an analog synthesizer method using a VCO, VCF, and VCA.").
Regarding claim 16, Kobayashi (in view of Usa) teaches a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 14 as discussed above.
Kobayashi further teaches that each of the timbre data candidates includes only the effect parameter (Kobayashi user interface figure, translated above, teaches a presentation module configured with an effect parameter for each piece of timbre data, in the middle-top figure.).
Usa further teaches that the effect parameter (Usa ¶0001: "This invention relates to a tone selection device that selects a predetermined tone from among sound source devices mounted on electronic musical instruments and the like, and a tone adjustment device that adjusts the parameters of the selected tone.") is combined with default waveform data to generate a sound, in the presenting of the plurality of pieces of the timbre data (Usa ¶0008: "Here, the waveform memory method sequentially reads out sample value data of musical tone waveforms stored in the waveform memory according to address data that changes in accordance with the pitch of the musical tone to be generated.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control method realized by a computer of Kobayashi by sounding the candidates as in Usa to easily adjust the parameters of a tone selected from a large number of tones spanning multiple sound sources to achieve a desired tone (Usa ¶0003).
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Usa and further in view of Silverstein (US 20190304418 A1, October 3, 2019).
Regarding claim 7, Kobayashi (in view of Usa) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 4 as discussed above.
Kobayashi (in view of Usa) does not explicitly disclose that as each of the timbre data candidates includes only the effect parameter, and as the natural language input by the user includes a musical instrument type, the presentation module is configured to generate a sound by combining the effect parameter with waveform data of the musical instrument type.
Kobayashi further teaches that each of the timbre data candidates includes only the effect parameter (Kobayashi user interface figure, translated above, teaches a presentation module configured with an effect parameter for each piece of timbre data, in the middle-top figure.).
Kobayashi (in view of Usa) does not explicitly disclose that the natural language input by the user includes a musical instrument type, the presentation module is configured to generate a sound by combining the effect parameter with waveform data of the musical instrument type.
However, Silverstein teaches that as the natural language input by the user (Silverstein ¶0037: "Another object of the present invention is to provide a new and improved Automated Music composition and Generation System that allows system users to be able to describe, in a manner natural to the user, including, but not limited to text, image, linguistics, speech, menu selection, time, audio file, video file, or other descriptive mechanism, what the user wants the music to convey, and/or the preferred style of the music, and/or the preferred timings of the music, and/or any single, pair, or other combination of these three input categories.") includes a musical instrument type (Silverstein ¶0176: "FIG. 15O is an exemplary graphical user interface (GUI) screen that is generated and served by the system illustrated in FIGS. 13 and 14, in response to the system user selecting the music style categories—Pop and Piano"), the presentation module is configured to generate a sound by combining the effect parameter (Silverstein ¶0799: "Controller Codes, or musical instructions including, but not limited to, modulation, breath, sustain, portamento, volume, pan position, expression, legato, reverb, tremolo, chorus, frequency cutoff, are a fundamental building block of any Digital Musical Piece.") with waveform data of the musical instrument type (Silverstein ¶0815: "A digital audio file, or a record of captured sound that can be played back, is a fundamental building block of any recorded musical piece. The Piece Consolidator Subsystem B35 collects the digital audio samples from an organized collection of individual audio files obtained from subsystem B34, and consolidates or combines these digital audio files into one or more than one digital audio file(s) that contain the same or greater amount of information. This process involves examining and determining methods to match waveforms, controller code and/or other manipulation tool data, and additional features of audio files that must be smoothly connected to each other. This digital audio samples to be consolidated by the Piece Consolidator Subsystem B35 are based on either user inputs (if given), computationally-determined value(s), or a combination of both.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kobayashi (as modified by Usa) by adding the combination of effect parameter with waveform data of Silverstein to reflect the strong relationship between emotion and style descriptors and instruments that play the music (Silverstein ¶0768).
Regarding claim 17, Kobayashi (in view of Usa) teaches a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 14 as discussed above.
Kobayashi further teaches that each of the timbre data candidates includes only the effect parameter (Kobayashi user interface figure, translated above, teaches a presentation module configured with an effect parameter for each piece of timbre data, in the middle-top figure.).
Kobayashi (in view of Usa) does not explicitly disclose that as the natural language input by the user includes a musical instrument type, the effect parameter is combined with waveform data of the musical instrument type to generate a sound, in the presenting of the plurality of pieces of the timbre data.
However, Silverstein teaches that as the natural language input by the user (Silverstein ¶0037: "Another object of the present invention is to provide a new and improved Automated Music Composition and Generation System that allows system users to be able to describe, in a manner natural to the user, including, but not limited to text, image, linguistics, speech, menu selection, time, audio file, video file, or other descriptive mechanism, what the user wants the music to convey, and/or the preferred style of the music, and/or the preferred timings of the music, and/or any single, pair, or other combination of these three input categories.") includes a musical instrument type (Silverstein ¶0176: "FIG. 15O is an exemplary graphical user interface (GUI) screen that is generated and served by the system illustrated in FIGS. 13 and 14, in response to the system user selecting the music style categories—Pop and Piano"), the effect parameter is combined with the waveform data of the musical instrument type (Silverstein ¶0815: "A digital audio file, or a record of captured sound that can be played back, is a fundamental building block of any recorded musical piece. The Piece Consolidator Subsystem B35 collects the digital audio samples from an organized collection of individual audio files obtained from subsystem B34, and consolidates or combines these digital audio files into one or more than one digital audio file(s) that contain the same or greater amount of information. This process involves examining and determining methods to match waveforms, controller code and/or other manipulation tool data, and additional features of audio files that must be smoothly connected to each other. This digital audio samples to be consolidated by the Piece Consolidator Subsystem B35 are based on either user inputs (if given), computationally-determined value(s), or a combination of both."), in the presenting of the plurality of pieces of the timbre data (Silverstein ¶0799: "Controller Codes, or musical instructions including, but not limited to, modulation, breath, sustain, portamento, volume, pan position, expression, legato, reverb, tremolo, chorus, frequency cutoff, are a fundamental building block of any Digital Musical Piece.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control method realized by a computer of Kobayashi (as modified by Usa) by adding the combination of effect parameter with waveform data of Silverstein to reflect the strong relationship between emotion and style descriptors and instruments that play the music (Silverstein ¶0768).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Usa and further in view of Silverstein and Nishimoto (JP H06149243 A, May 27, 1994).
Regarding claim 8, Kobayashi (in view of Usa and further in view of Silverstein) teaches an information processing device comprising the features of claim 7 as discussed above.
Kobayashi (in view of Usa and further in view of Silverstein) does not explicitly disclose that the presentation module is configured to restrict the timbre data candidates in accordance with the musical instrument type.
However, Nishimoto teaches that the presentation module (Nishimoto ¶0001: "The present invention relates to an electronic musical instrument that allows the user to select keywords representing timbre attributes such as the type of instrument and the feel of the sound, thereby displaying timbre names corresponding to these keywords, and enabling the user to select a timbre from these timbre names.") is configured to restrict the timbre data candidates in accordance with the musical instrument type (Nishimoto ¶0005: "Therefore, it is being considered that keywords representing the attributes of timbre, such as the type of instrument and the feel of the sound, will be associated with each timbre name and stored in memory. By selecting these keywords, the types of timbres will be limited and displayed, allowing users to search for the desired timbre that matches the attributes of the selected keyword.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kobayashi (as modified by Usa and Silverstein) by adding the filtering of timbre data candidates of Nishimoto to narrow the search to timbres with specific attributes, which has the advantage of making it easy to find the desired timbre (Nishimoto ¶0005).
Regarding claim 18, Kobayashi (in view of Usa and further in view of Silverstein) teaches a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 17 as discussed above.
Kobayashi (in view of Usa and further in view of Silverstein) does not explicitly disclose that the timbre data candidates are restricted in accordance with the musical instrument type, in the presenting of the plurality of pieces of the timbre data.
However, Nishimoto teaches that the timbre data candidates are restricted in accordance with the musical instrument type (Nishimoto ¶0005: "Therefore, it is being considered that keywords representing the attributes of timbre, such as the type of instrument and the feel of the sound, will be associated with each timbre name and stored in memory. By selecting these keywords, the types of timbres will be limited and displayed, allowing users to search for the desired timbre that matches the attributes of the selected keyword."), in the presenting of the plurality of pieces of the timbre data (Nishimoto ¶0001: "The present invention relates to an electronic musical instrument that allows the user to select keywords representing timbre attributes such as the type of instrument and the feel of the sound, thereby displaying timbre names corresponding to these keywords, and enabling the user to select a timbre from these timbre names.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control method realized by a computer of Kobayashi (as modified by Usa and Silverstein) by adding the filtering of timbre data candidates of Nishimoto to narrow the search to timbres with specific attributes, which has the advantage of making it easy to find the desired timbre (Nishimoto ¶0005).
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Silverstein.
Regarding claim 9, Kobayashi discloses an information processing device comprising the features of claim 2 as discussed above.
Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose that the at least one processor is configured to execute the plurality of modules further including a training module configured to perform additional training of the trained model based on the adjective included in the natural language input by the user and one piece of the timbre data that is selected by the user from the timbre data candidates.
However, Silverstein teaches that the at least one processor is configured to execute the plurality of modules further including a training module configured to perform additional training of the trained model (Silverstein ¶0035: "Another object of the present invention is to provide an Automated Music Composition and Generation System, wherein automated learning capabilities are supported so that the musical spirit of the system can transform, adapt and evolve over time, in response to interaction with system users") based on the adjective included in the natural language input by the user and one piece of the timbre data that is selected by the user from the timbre data candidates (Silverstein ¶0846: "In response, the system user provides feedback to subsystem B46: more romantic. In response, the subsystem B46 performs its functions and the piece is recreated. The third piece created adds a piano to the electric guitar and the system user provides feedback to the subsystem B46: perfect. In response, the subsystem B46 modifies the instrumentation parameter table for this system user with the romantic descriptor so as to increase the probability of electric guitar and piano being used, and decreasing the probability of using strings during the instrumentation process.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kobayashi by adding the training module of Silverstein to enable the device to transform, adapt, and evolve over time in response to interaction with users (Silverstein ¶0035).
Regarding claim 19, Kobayashi discloses a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 12 as discussed above.
Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose performing additional training of the trained model based on the adjective that is included in the natural language input by the user and one piece of timbre data selected by the user from among the timbre data candidates.
However, Silverstein teaches performing additional training of the trained model (Silverstein ¶0035: "Another object of the present invention is to provide an Automated Music Composition and Generation System, wherein automated learning capabilities are supported so that the musical spirit of the system can transform, adapt and evolve over time, in response to interaction with system users") based on the adjective that is included in the natural language input by the user and one piece of timbre data selected by the user from among the timbre data candidates (Silverstein ¶0846: "In response, the system user provides feedback to subsystem B46: more romantic. In response, the subsystem B46 performs its functions and the piece is recreated. The third piece created adds a piano to the electric guitar and the system user provides feedback to the subsystem B46: perfect. In response, the subsystem B46 modifies the instrumentation parameter table for this system user with the romantic descriptor so as to increase the probability of electric guitar and piano being used, and decreasing the probability of using strings during the instrumentation process.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control method realized by a computer of Kobayashi by adding the training module of Silverstein to enable the device to transform, adapt, and evolve over time in response to interaction with users (Silverstein ¶0035).
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Stasis et al. ("A Model for Adaptive Reduced-Dimensionality Equalisation," December 3, 2015, retrieved May 25, 2026 from https://www.dafx.de/paper-archive/2015/DAFx-15_submission_34.pdf), hereinafter Stasis.
Regarding claim 10, Kobayashi discloses an information processing device comprising the features of claim 2 as discussed above.
Kobayshi does not explicitly disclose that the timbre estimation module is configured to obtain from a latent space, latent variables tagged with the adjective included in the natural language input by the user, and input the latent variables to the trained model, thereby outputting the plurality of pieces of the timbre data.
However, Stasis teaches that the timbre estimation module is configured to obtain from a latent space (Stasis abstract: "We present a method for mapping between the input space of a parametric equaliser and a lower-dimensional representation, whilst preserving the effect’s dependency on the incoming audio signal."), latent variables tagged with the adjective included in the natural language input by the user (Stasis abstract: "The model is trained with parameter space data representing two timbral adjectives (warm and bright), measured across a range of musical instrument samples, allowing users to impose a semantically-meaningful timbral modification using the lower-dimensional interface."), and input the latent variables to the trained model (Stasis § 3: "After an initial training phase, the user can then submit (x, y) coordinates to the system using a track-pad interface, resulting in a timbral modification via the corresponding filter parameters."), thereby outputting the plurality of pieces of the timbre data (Stasis abstract: "a stacked autoencoder algorithm exhibits the lowest parameter reconstruction variance, thus providing an accurate map between the input and output space").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the information processing device of Kobayashi by adding the latent variables of Stasis to allow users to impose a semantically-meaningful timbral modification using the lower-dimensional interface (Stasis abstract).
Regarding claim 20, Kobayashi discloses a control method realized by a computer comprising the features of claim 12 as discussed above.
Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose that the outputting of the plurality of pieces of timbre data is performed by obtaining from a latent space latent variables tagged with the adjectives included in the natural language input by the user, and by inputting the latent variables to the trained model.
However, Stasis teaches that the outputting of the plurality of pieces of timbre data (Stasis abstract: " a stacked autoencoder algorithm exhibits the lowest parameter reconstruction variance, thus providing an accurate map between the input and output space") is performed by obtaining from a latent space (Stasis abstract: "We present a method for mapping between the input space of a parametric equaliser and a lower-dimensional representation, whilst preserving the effect’s dependency on the incoming audio signal.") latent variables tagged with the adjectives included in the natural language input by the user (Stasis abstract: "The model is trained with parameter space data representing two timbral adjectives (warm and bright), measured across a range of musical instrument samples, allowing users to impose a semantically-meaningful timbral modification using the lower-dimensional interface."), and by inputting the latent variables to the trained model (Stasis § 3: "After an initial training phase, the user can then submit (x, y) coordinates to the system using a track-pad interface, resulting in a timbral modification via the corresponding filter parameters.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control method realized by a computer of Kobayashi by adding the latent variables of Stasis to allow users to impose a semantically-meaningful timbral modification using the lower-dimensional interface (Stasis abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP SCOLES whose telephone number is (703)756-1831. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dedei Hammond can be reached on 571-270-7938. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PHILIP G SCOLES/
Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights