Papers › The Costs of Reproducibility in Music Separation Research: a Replication of Band-Split RNN

The Costs of Reproducibility in Music Separation Research: a Replication of Band-Split RNN

10 Mar 2026arXiv:2603.09187added by Syntology

Paul Magron, Romain Serizel, Constance Douwes

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Music source separation is the task of isolating the instrumental tracks from a music song. Despite its spectacular recent progress, the trend towards more complex architectures and training protocols exacerbates reproducibility issues. The band-split recurrent neural networks (BSRNN) model is promising in this regard, since it yields close to state-of-the-art results on public datasets, and requires reasonable resources for training. Unfortunately, it is not straightforward to reproduce since its full code is not available. In this paper, we attempt to replicate BSRNN as closely as possible to the original paper through extensive experiments, which allows us to conduct a critical reflection on this reproducibility issue. Our contributions are three-fold. First, this study yields several insights on the model design and training pipeline, which sheds light on potential future improvements. In particular, since we were unsuccessful in reproducing the original results, we explore additional variants that ultimately yield an optimized BSRNN model, whose performance largely improves that of the original. Second, we discuss reproducibility issues from both methodological and practical perspectives. We notably underline how substantial time and energy costs could have been saved upon availability of the full pipeline. Third, our code and pre-trained models are released publicly to foster reproducible research. We hope that this study will contribute to spread awareness on the importance of reproducible research in the music separation community, and help promoting more transparent and sustainable practices.

Code

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

10 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 10 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 10 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2603.09187, was issued in March 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections