MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

AI-Driven Bioacoustics in Poultry Farming: A Critical Systematic Review on Vocalization Analysis for Stress and Disease Detection

2025· preprint· en· W4410576624 on OpenAlexfundno aff
V. M. Manikandan, Suresh Neethirajan

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsBioacousticsStress (linguistics)AgricultureComputer scienceBiologyEcologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fusion of artificial intelligence (AI) and acoustic sensing is fundamentally reshaping poultry welfare monitoring by offering unprecedented, non-invasive insights into the emotional, physiological, and behavioral states of birds through vocal analysis. This systematic review delves into the transformative intersection of bioacoustics, machine learning, and animal welfare, meticulously examining the shift from traditional acoustic feature extraction methods, like Mel-Frequency Cepstral Coefficients (MFCCs) and spectrogram analysis, toward cutting-edge deep learning architectures, such as CNNs, LSTMs, attention mechanisms, and powerful self-supervised models like wav2vec2 and Whisper. Critically, it highlights the evolution toward compact, real-time deployment solutions, including TinyML and edge computing, designed specifically for the dynamic and noisy environments of commercial poultry farms. Emotion recognition, early disease detection, and nuanced behavioral decoding emerge as pivotal application areas, underscoring the immense potential for proactive and responsive livestock management. Furthermore, the review sheds light on emerging open-source toolkits and automated pipelines enhancing dataset preprocessing, annotation accuracy, and robust acoustic inference. Employing advanced bibliometric mapping and thematic clustering, the paper identifies critical gaps in research reproducibility, dataset standardization, and the interpretability of complex AI models. It calls for rigorous advancements in explainable AI methodologies, advocates for greater cross-species generalization of acoustic models, and urges a conscientious approach to ethical AI design. Ultimately, this review underscores the necessity for holistic, interpretable, and ethically informed frameworks, positioning acoustic AI as a transformative force in enhancing animal welfare and operational efficiency within the poultry industry.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207