Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 2, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Large-scale annotation of environmental sound recordings presents significant challenges under time and resource constraints, particularly when sound categories are imbalanced and only part of a dataset has been labeled. This paper describes the development and evaluation of a human-AI workflow used during annotation of the Kenya Forest Sounds Dataset (KFSD), using a project-stage working collection of 7,531 audio recordings across 21 categories. We investigated zero-shot classification, a feature-based ensemble, and a fine-tuned Audio Spectrogram Transformer (AST). The fine-tuned AST achieved 89.36% accuracy, 85.98% precision, 89.24% recall, and 87.58% F1 on held-out test data for binary classification of Person talking. Because this result remained below the predefined 95% threshold for autonomous annotation, model predictions were used as suggestions and subjected to human verification. Of the 5,026 initially unlabeled recordings, 2,337 were routed to a speech-verification queue and 2,689 remained for ordinary manual annotation. The verifier reviewed all 2,337 machine-labeled files and detected zero false positives, yielding 100% verification accuracy. The observed average verification time was approximately 4.2 seconds per file. At an average rate of 35 seconds per file for manual annotation, the hybrid workflow reduced work on the remaining queue from approximately 48.9 to 28.9 person-hours, saving about 20.0 hours (41%). The study documents the model-selection process, provenance-aware file organization, verification procedure, observed errors, practical limitations, and opportunities for extending AI assistance beyond one category.