mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Parameter-Free Few-Shot Evaluation for Elephant Vocalisation Classification

arXiv 2608.14824 ↗First posted 14 Aug 2026eess.AS cs.LG cs.SDcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We present a parameter-free episodic evaluation of nearest-centroid classification of elephant vocalisations on fixed pretrained embeddings, for the Elephant Voices (EV) and Linguistic Data Consortium (LDC) datasets. We ask not which embedding yields the best classifier trained on all labelled data, but how the simplest classifier performs as the number of exemplars per class varies. There are no learnable parameters, because each class is modelled as the mean of its support embeddings and each query is assigned to the nearest centroid under squared Euclidean distance. Evaluation covers the fixed Perch (ver. 1), Perch (ver. 2) and HuBERT (base, layer 2) embeddings, alongside mel frequency cepstral coefficient (MFCC) features, N-way k-shot, under the same stratified K-fold cross-validation protocol as the trained classifiers. None of these embedding models was trained to distinguish elephant call types. On the smaller EV dataset the centroid classifier is markedly data-efficient. Using Perch (ver. 1) or Perch (ver. 2) embeddings it overtakes in mean average precision (mAP) the fully-trained logistic regression (LR) baseline from one or two exemplars and the recurrent baseline from two. Over the reduced set of call types on which the strongly-supervised end-to-end baseline was trained, the centroid classifier using Perch (ver. 2) embeddings overtakes that baseline in mAP as well, from two exemplars. On the larger LDC dataset the recurrent baselines retain their advantage for all considered values of k. Only LR is overtaken, and only in mAP. Nearest-centroid classification is therefore preferable precisely when exemplars are few and the fixed embedding already separates the call types.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Aug 2026.

Builds on

20 of 51 references.

References · 20

  1. 2020wav2vec 2.0: A Framework for Self-Supervised Learning of Speech Representationscited by 3,905
  2. 2017Prototypical Networks for Few-shot Learningcited by 3,015
  3. 2021HuBERT: Self-Supervised Speech Representation Learning by Masked Prediction of Hidden Unitscited by 2,342
  4. 2016Matching Networks for One Shot Learningcited by 2,255
  5. 2022BEATs: Audio Pre-Training with Acoustic Tokenizerscited by 388
  6. 2021Layer-wise Analysis of a Self-supervised Speech Representation Modelcited by 298
  7. 2020Contrastive Learning of General-Purpose Audio Representationscited by 169
  8. 2021Computational bioacoustics with deep learning: a review and roadmapcited by 78
  9. 2023Global birdsong embeddings enable superior transfer learning for bioacoustic classificationcited by 51
  10. 2022BEANS: The Benchmark of Animal Soundscited by 38
  11. 2025Perch 2.0: The Bittern Lesson for Bioacousticscited by 26
  12. 2023Learning to detect an animal sound from five examplescited by 14
8 more
  1. 2022Few-shot bioacoustic event detection at the DCASE 2022 challengecited by 13
  2. 2025Perch 2.0 transfers 'whale' to underwater taskscited by 7
  3. 2019Automatic Detection and Compression for Passive Acoustic Monitoring of the African Forest Elephantcited by 5
  4. 2025Crossing the Species Divide: Transfer Learning from Speech to Animal Soundscited by 4
  5. 2023Few-shot bioacoustic event detection at the DCASE 2023 challengecited by 3
  6. 2024Learning to rumble: Automated elephant call classification, detection and endpointing using deep architecturescited by 3
  7. 2023Elephants and Algorithms: A Review of the Current and Future Role of AI in Elephant Monitoringcited by 1
  8. 2026From Birdsong to Rumbles: Classifying Elephant Calls with Out-of-Species Embeddingscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.