MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084110111 · doi:10.1109/crv.2014.35

Computer Vision-Based Identification of Individual Turtles Using Characteristic Patterns of Their Plastrons

2014· article· en· W2084110111 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor Beugeling, Alexandra Branzan-Albu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurtle Biology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurtle (robot)Artificial intelligenceIdentification (biology)Computer scienceComputer visionIdentity (music)Artificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Image processingImage (mathematics)Feature (linguistics)Feature extractionVisualizationPoint (geometry)MathematicsBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The identification of pond turtles is important to scientists who monitor local populations, as it allows them to track the growth and health of subjects over their lifetime. Traditional non-invasive methods for turtle recognition involve the visual inspection of distinctive coloured patterns on their plastron. This visual inspection is time consuming and difficult to scale with a potential growth in the surveyed population. We propose an algorithm for automatic identification of individual turtles based on images of their plastron. Our approach uses a combination of image processing and neural networks. We perform a convexity-concavity analysis of the contours on the plastron. The output of this analysis is combined with additional region-based measurements to compute feature vectors that characterize individual turtles. These features are used to train a neural network. Our goal is to create a neural network which is able to query a database of images of turtles of known identity with an image of an unknown turtle, and which outputs the unknown turtle's identity. The paper provides a thorough experimental evaluation of the proposed approach. Results are promising and point towards future work in the area of standardized image acquisition and image denoising.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTurtle Biology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207