Skip to content

FLOMSS: Generative Music Source Separation by Flow Matching

Paper · arXiv 2610.17821 · daily list of October 26, 2026

Shuyang Cui, Zhi Zhong, Keisuke Toyama, Koichi Saito, Qiyu Wu, Yukara Ikemiya and 7 more

Collected · snapshot shipped with the site build, not a live feed

Abstract · as written by the authors

Music source separation (MSS) has been conventionally addressed by discriminative methods. Recently, flow matching has emerged as a strong generative paradigm for modeling complex data distributions, with successful applications across diverse domains. These advances motivate us to systematically investigate flow matching for MSS in a four-source (Vocals, Bass, Drums, Other) setting in full-band stereo. Specifically, we investigate prediction targets, flow paths, single-source versus multi-source modeling, and mixture consistency constraints. Beyond the signal-level metrics commonly used for MSS, such as signal-to-distortion ratio, we further evaluate MSS methods using embedding-based metrics, as well as a listening test, providing a comprehensive benchmark. On MUSDB18-HQ, our proposed model exhibits competitive performance in both objective and subjective tests, highlighting the potential of flow matching for generative MSS. Demo: https://ik4sumii.github.io/FLOMSS/

This is the original abstract from arXiv. It has not been summarised, translated or rewritten.

Terms in plain language

Automatic

Made by matching the words of the title and abstract against a fixed list of definitions. It does not read the paper and does not change the abstract above.

embedding
a list of numbers that captures the meaning of a piece of text, an image or other data, so that similar items get similar lists.
benchmark
a fixed set of tasks or questions used to compare models on the same test.

Questions about this paper

Where can I read the full paper?

On arXiv, under the identifier 2610.17821: the abstract page is https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17821 and the PDF is https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.17821. The text on this page is the authors' abstract, not a summary.

Is there code for this paper?

No repository is attached to the paper on Hugging Face. The authors may still have released code; the abstract or the PDF would say so.

What do the upvotes mean?

3 signed-in Hugging Face users upvoted it on the daily list of October 26, 2026. Upvotes measure attention from that community, not peer review.

What are the plain-language terms under the abstract?

Short notes on the technical words of the title and abstract, in everyday English, taken from a fixed list of definitions that we wrote. They are made automatically by matching words, so a note can miss a term or give a meaning that does not fit this paper. The abstract above them is the authors’ text and is not changed.