Comment 5 for bug 1882776

Your proposed method is equivalent to the mean of the time intervals between taps.

However, your comment made me realize something. If you think about the taps as normally distributed time intervals (the time intervals between adjacent taps), this means that whenever you tap one beat too late, all subsequent beats will also be too late.

I think the right model in this case is to think of taps as a normally distributed error with respect to the ideal beat position. This means that each tap accuracy is independent of the other taps. If an outlier happens and for example you make one tap too late, the next tap will still be somewhat on time and the time interval between them will be smaller, thus compensating for the longer time interval of the previous tap. I think this models reality better.

From this point of view, the IQM might not be the right tool here. I'm not sure about the regular mean either, because it is over-sensitive on the accuracy of the first and last beat: It doesn't matter how good you tap the beats in between, if you are not accurate on either the first or the last, the bpm will be off.

Maybe we can draw some code from the constant bpm analyzer to solve this.