Skip to content

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

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 51 references
Engineering Computer Science Biology

Abstract

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.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Conference Open access Jun 2018

Gibson Env: Real-World Perception for Embodied Agents

This paper investigates developing real-world perception for active agents, proposes Gibson Environment for this purpose, and showcases a set of perceptual tasks learned therein.

F. Xia, Amir Zamir, Zhi-Yang He et al. · 1,069 citations · ⚡112
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Diffusion models as plug-and-play priors

The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.

Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al. · 316 citations · ⚡15

Trajectory Balance: Improved Credit Assignment in GFlowNets

It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...

Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al. · 302 citations · ⚡60

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 23, 2026

Q&A: How AI came to model the “messy” human mind

Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.