Rookognise: Acoustic detection and identification of individual rooks in field recordings using multi-task neural networks
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2022.101818
Abstract
Individual-level monitoring is essential in many behavioural and bioacoustics studies. Collecting and annotating those data is costly in terms of human effort, but necessary prior to conducting analysis. In particular, many studies on bird vocalisations also involve manipulating the animals or human presence during observations, which may bias vocal production. Autonomous recording units can be used to collect large amounts of data without human supervision, largely removing those sources of bias. Deep learning can further facilitate the annotation of large amounts of data, for instance to detect vocalisations, identify the species, or recognise the vocalisation types in recordings. Acoustic individual identification, however, has so far largely remained limited to a single vocalisation type for a given species. This has limited the use of those techniques for automated data collection on raw recordings, where many individuals can produce vocalisations of varying complexity, potentially overlapping one another, with the additional presence of unknown and varying background noise. This paper aims at bridging this gap by developing a system to identify individual animals in those difficult conditions. Our system leverages a combination of multi-scale information integration, multi-channel audio and multi-task learning. The multi-task learning paradigm is based the overall task into four sub-tasks, three of which are auxiliary tasks: the detection and segmentation of vocalisations against other noises, the classification of individuals vocalising at any point during a sample, and the sexing of detected vocalisations. The fourth task is the overall identification of individuals. To test our approach, we recorded a captive group of rooks, a Eurasian social corvid with a diverse vocal repertoire. We used a multi-microphone array and collected a large scale dataset of time-stamped and identified vocalisations recorded, and found the system to work reliably for the defined tasks. To our knowledge, the system is the first to acoustically identify individuals regardless of the vocalisation produced. Our system can readily assist data collection and individual monitoring of groups of animals in both outdoor and indoor settings, even across long periods of time, and regardless of a species’ vocal complexity. All data and code used in this article is available online.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
CNN- and MFCC-based models can now recognize individuals with 95-99% accuracy across taxa, from gibbons to lions, and multi-task networks can generalize across different call types.
“CNN- and MFCC-based models can now recognize individuals with 95–99% accuracy across taxa, from gibbons to lions, and multi-task networks even manage to generalize across different call types”
From Listening forward: emerging roles of bioacoustics in ecology, evolution, and conservation (2026) · cites this paper as Martin et al. 2022
Gibbon duets, lion roars, and rook calls carry distinctive signatures that can be used to track individuals over time.
“Gibbon duets, lion roars, and rook calls have all been shown to carry distinctive signatures that can be used to track individuals over time”
From Listening forward: emerging roles of bioacoustics in ecology, evolution, and conservation (2026) · cites this paper as Martin et al. 2022
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 92 · Cited by 6
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Bogaards, N., Röbel, A., & Rodet, X. (2004). Sound Analysis and Processing with AudioSculpt 2. Proc. Int. Computer Music Conference (ICMC), 2-5.
- Brown, E. D., & Veltman, C. J. (1987). Ethogram of the Australian Magpie (Gym- norhina tibicen) in Comparison to Other Cracticidae and Corvus Species. Ethology, 76(4), 309-333. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1987. · DOI
- Caruana, R. (1997). Multitask Learning (Doctoral dissertation). Carnegie Mellon University. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7687-1 100322 · DOI
- Cohen, Y., Nicholson, D., & Gardner, T. J. (2020). TweetyNet: A neural network that enables high-throughput, automated annotation of birdsong. bioRxiv, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.28.272088 · DOI
- Federspiel, I. G. (2010). Sociality , Social Learning and Individual Differences in Rooks , Jackdaws and Eurasian Jays (Doctoral dissertation).
- Fristrup, K. M., & Mennitt, D. (2012). Biacoustical monitoring in terrestrial envi- ronments. Acoustics Today, 8(3), 16-24.
- Yong, H., Huang, J., Hua, X., & Zhang, L. (2020). Gradient Centralization: A New Optimization Technique for Deep Neural Networks. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial In- telligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 12346 LNCS, 635-652. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58452-8 37 · DOI
- Authors
- Martin, K., Adam, O., Obin, N., & Dufour, V.
- Affiliations
- Université de Tours (FR)
- Université Paris-Sud (FR)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Martin, Killian
- Venue
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2022-02-19
- OpenAlex
- W4212779830
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 92
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
- Keywords
- rook, Corvus corax, multi-task learning, multi-microphone arrays, bird vocalizations, personal monitoring, autonomous recording units
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review