Submitted:
20 September 2023
Posted:
26 September 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
Introduction
Historical Context—Evolution of Animal Welfare: Traditional Practices vs. Modern Methodologies
The Advent of Technology in Farming: Initial Technological Interventions
The Science of Animal Emotions and Cognition: An Analytical Exploration into the Sentient Spectrum
Brain Lateralization: Dissecting Hemispheric Dominance in the Animal Kingdom
Sentience and Cognitive Proficiency: Affirming the Sentient Status of Animals
The Prospective Horizon: Implications, Innovations, and Ethical Considerations
Modern Technological Tools and Techniques: A Scientific Exploration into the Nexus of Cognitive Computing and Animal Welfare
Digital Imaging and Videos: A Paradigm Shift in Animal Behavior Monitoring
Sound Vocalization: Unveiling the Acoustic Spectrum of Animal Cognition
Mirror and Bias Tests: Probing the Depths of Animal Self-awareness and Preferences
Charting the Future Trajectory
Cognitive Computing in Action: Pioneering the Next Frontier in Animal Welfare and Management
Facial Recognition for Emotions: Beyond Human Interpretation
Ear Base Temperature of Pigs: A Thermographic Insight into Well-being
The Interplay of Sleep, Stress, and Welfare in Dairy Cows: An Exploration Leveraging Cognitive Computing and Advanced Sensing Modalities
The Physiological Imperative of Sleep
Stress: Implications and Manifestations
The Advent of Non-Invasive Monitoring
fNIRS: A Window into Neural Processes
Vigilant States: Implications for Welfare
Automated Decision Making: The Pinnacle of Real-time Animal Management
The Horizon of Cognitive Computing in Animal Welfare
Challenges and Ethical Considerations in the Era of Cognitive Computing for Animal Welfare
Data Privacy and Security: Safeguarding the Digital Footprint of Animals
Over-reliance on Technology: The Double-Edged Sword of Automation
A Future of Ethical Technological Integration
Case Studies: Successes and Failures in the Integration of Technology into Animal Welfare
Robotic Dairy Farms: The Dawn of a New Era in Dairy Farming
Poultry and Swine Management: Deciphering Behavior through Technology
Lessons Learned: Reflecting on the Technological Journey
Conclusions—Bridging the Digital Divide in Animal Welfare with Cognitive Computing
Conflicts of Interest
References
- de Oliveira, C.S.; Sanin, C.; Szczerbicki, E. Smart Knowledge Engineering for Cognitive Systems: A Brief Overview. Cybern. Syst. 2022, 53, 384–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perconti, P.; Plebe, A. Deep learning and cognitive science. Cognition 2020, 203, 104365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sreedevi, A.; Harshitha, T.N.; Sugumaran, V.; Shankar, P. Application of cognitive computing in healthcare, cybersecurity, big data and IoT: A literature review. Inf. Process. Manag. 2022, 59, 102888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kriegeskorte, N.; Douglas, P.K. Cognitive computational neuroscience. Nat. Neurosci. 2018, 21, 1148–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Budaev, S.; Kristiansen, T.S.; Giske, J.; Eliassen, S. Computational animal welfare: towards cognitive architecture models of animal sentience, emotion and wellbeing. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2020, 7, 201886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. Recent advances in wearable sensors for animal health management. Sens. Bio-Sens. Res. 2017, 12, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S.; Reimert, I.; Kemp, B. Measuring Farm Animal Emotions—Sensor-Based Approaches. Sensors 2021, 21, 553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. (2023). Artificial Intelligence & Sensor Innovations—Enhancing Livestock Welfare with a Human-Centric Approach. [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Assessing Affective States in Livestock. Front. Veter- Sci. 2021, 8, 715261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. Affective State Recognition in Livestock—Artificial Intelligence Approaches. Animals 2022, 12, 759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. Happy Cow or Thinking Pig? WUR Wolf—Facial Coding Platform for Measuring Emotions in Farm Animals. AI 2021, 2, 342–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siniscalchi, M.; D’ingeo, S.; Quaranta, A. Lateralized emotional functioning in domestic animals. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2021, 237, 105282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogers, L.J. Brain Lateralization and Cognitive Capacity. Animals 2021, 11, 1996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fernandes, A.F.A.; Dórea, J.R.R.; Rosa, G.J.d.M. Image Analysis and Computer Vision Applications in Animal Sciences: An Overview. Front. Veter- Sci. 2020, 7, 551269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van den Heuvel, H., Youssef, A., Grat, L.M., & Neethirajan, S. (2022). Quantifying the Effect of an Acute Stressor in Laying Hens using Thermographic Imaging and Vocalisations. bioRxiv, 2022-07.
- Olczak, K.; Penar, W.; Nowicki, J.; Magiera, A.; Klocek, C. The Role of Sound in Livestock Farming—Selected Aspects. Animals 2023, 13, 2307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mcloughlin, M.P.; Stewart, R.; McElligott, A.G. Automated bioacoustics: methods in ecology and conservation and their potential for animal welfare monitoring. J. R. Soc. Interface 2019, 16, 20190225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ntalampiras, S., Pezzuolo, A., Mattiello, S., Battini, M., & Brščić, M. (2020). Automatic detection of cow/calf vocalizations in free-stall barn. In 2020 43rd International Conference on Telecommunications and Signal Processing (TSP) (pp. 41-45). IEEE.
- Roy, R.C., & Roy, S. (2019). Swine Communication. In Vonk, J., & Shackelford, T. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior. Springer, Cham.
- Papageorgiou, M.; Simitzis, P.E. Positive Welfare Indicators in Dairy Animals. Dairy 2022, 3, 814–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broom, D.M. Farm animal welfare: A key component of the sustainability of farming systems. Veter- Glas. 2021, 75, 145–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baragli, P.; Demuru, E.; Scopa, C.; Palagi, E. Are horses capable of mirror self-recognition? A pilot study. PLOS ONE 2017, 12, e0176717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mandel, R.; Wenker, M.L.; van Reenen, K.; Keil, N.M.; Hillmann, E. Can access to an automated grooming brush and/or a mirror reduce stress of dairy cows kept in social isolation? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2019, 211, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. Is Seeing Still Believing? Leveraging Deepfake Technology for Livestock Farming. Front. Veter- Sci. 2021, 8, 740253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. Transforming the Adaptation Physiology of Farm Animals through Sensors. Animals 2020, 10, 1512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koltes, J.E.; Koltes, D.A.; Mote, B.E.; Tucker, J.; Hubbell, D.S., III. Automated collection of heat stress data in livestock: new technologies and opportunities. Translational Animal Science 2018, 2, 319–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. AI in Sustainable Pig Farming: IoT Insights into Stress and Gait. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.H.; Poulose, A.; Colaco, S.J.; Neethirajan, S.; Han, D.S. Enhancing Animal Welfare with Interaction Recognition: A Deep Dive into Pig Interaction Using Xception Architecture and SSPD-PIR Method. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ternman, E.; Hänninen, L.; Pastell, M.; Agenäs, S.; Nielsen, P.P. Sleep in dairy cows recorded with a non-invasive EEG technique. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2012, 140, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunter, L.B.; Baten, A.; Haskell, M.J.; Langford, F.M.; O’connor, C.; Webster, J.R.; Stafford, K. Machine learning prediction of sleep stages in dairy cows from heart rate and muscle activity measures. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 10938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Fei, X.; Liu, X.; Wang, Y.; Hu, Y.; Peng, W.; Wang, Y.-W.; Zhang, S.; Xu, M. REM sleep is associated with distinct global cortical dynamics and controlled by occipital cortex. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 6896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acharya, R.Y.; Hemsworth, P.H.; Coleman, G.J.; Kinder, J.E. The Animal-Human Interface in Farm Animal Production: Animal Fear, Stress, Reproduction and Welfare. Animals 2022, 12, 487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruet, A.; Arnould, C.; Lemarchand, J.; Parias, C.; Mach, N.; Moisan, M.-P.; Foury, A.; Briant, C.; Lansade, L. Horse welfare: A joint assessment of four categories of behavioural indicators using the AWIN protocol, scan sampling and surveys. Anim. Welf. 2022, 31, 455–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. The Significance and Ethics of Digital Livestock Farming. Agriengineering 2023, 5, 488–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. Artificial Intelligence and Sensor Technologies in Dairy Livestock Export: Charting a Digital Transformation. Sensors 2023, 23, 7045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

| Technique/Method | Description | Advantages | Limitations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Predictive Analytics | Use of advanced algorithms and machine learning to predict and analyze animal behavior based on collected data. | Can predict potential health or behavioral issues. Provides data-driven insights. -Continuous evolution and learning from new data. | Requires vast amounts of data for accuracy. Potential for over-reliance on technology. May miss nuances that human caregivers can notice. |
| Real-time Monitoring | Use of sensors and devices to monitor animal behavior and health in real-time, feeding data to cognitive computing systems. | - Immediate detection of anomalies. - Enables proactive care. - Reduces human observation errors. | Requires constant power and connectivity. - Potential for data privacy issues. |
| Behavioral Pattern Recognition | Algorithms that recognize specific patterns in animal behavior, indicating mood, health, or needs. | - Enhances understanding of animal emotions. - Allows for tailored care based on individual behavior. | May require calibration for different species. - Potential for false positives. |
| Voice and Sound Analysis | Analyzing animal sounds and vocalizations using machine learning to detect distress, happiness, or other emotions. | - Non-invasive method of understanding animal emotions. - Can detect issues not visible through behavior. | Requires clear audio data. - May need extensive training data for accuracy. |
| Environmental Impact Analysis | Using cognitive computing to analyze how environmental factors impact animal behavior and well-being. | - Helps in creating optimal living conditions. - Can predict how changes in environment affect animals. | Requires multi-factor data collection. - Complex interactions may be hard to decipher. |
| Genetic and Health Analytics | Integrating genetic data with behavioral data to understand animal predispositions and health risks. | - Comprehensive understanding of animal health. - Can lead to personalized care plans. | - Requires genetic data which may be hard to obtain. - Ethical considerations around genetic data usage. |
| Interactive Learning Systems | Systems that learn from animal interactions and adapt to provide better care or stimulation. | - Enhances animal enrichment. - Provides dynamic response based on animal needs. | - Requires sophisticated technology. - Potential for system malfunctions. |
| Emotion Recognition Systems | Use of cameras and sensors to detect and interpret animal emotions based on facial expressions or body language. | - Direct insight into animal emotional state. - Non-invasive and continuous monitoring. | - Requires extensive training data. - May not be applicable to all species. |
| Automated Health Diagnostics | Systems that automatically diagnose potential health issues based on behavior, sound, or other data. | - Early detection of health issues. - Reduces reliance on periodic health checks. | - Potential for false positives or negatives. - Requires integration with other health systems. |
| Decision Support Systems | Cognitive computing systems that assist caregivers in making decisions about animal care based on collected data. | - Enhances decision-making with data-driven insights. - Reduces human error in care decisions. | - Over-reliance can reduce human intuition in care. - Requires continuous data input and updates. |
Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).