ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Bird song comparison using deep learning trained from avian perceptual judgments.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Deep audio embeddings for vocalisation clustering.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Our understanding of bird song, a model system for animal communication and the neurobiology of learning, depends critically on making reliable, validated comparisons between the complex multidimensional syllables that are used in songs. However, most assessments of song similarity are based on human inspection of spectrograms, or computational methods developed from human intuitions. Using a novel automated operant conditioning system, we collected a large corpus of zebra finches' (Taeniopygia guttata) decisions about song syllable similarity. We use this dataset to compare and externally validate similarity algorithms in widely-used publicly available software (Raven, Sound Analysis Pro, Luscinia). Although these methods all perform better than chance, they do not closely emulate the avian assessments. We then introduce a novel deep learning method that can produce perceptual similarity judgements trained on such avian decisions. We find that this new method outperforms the established methods in accuracy and more closely approaches the avian assessments. Inconsistent (hence ambiguous) decisions are a common occurrence in animal behavioural data; we show that a modification of the deep learning training that accommodates these leads to the strongest performance. We argue this approach is the best way to validate methods to compare song similarity, that our dataset can be used to validate novel methods, and that the general approach can easily be extended to other species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.