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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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