MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320758192 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0124

DeepVision: a stereo camera system provides highly accurate counts and lengths of fish passing inside a trawl

2013· article· en· W2320758192 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shale Rosen, Terje Jørgensen, Darren Hammersland-White, Jens Christian Holst

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsTrawlingSampling (signal processing)Fish <Actinopterygii>FisheryScale (ratio)Environmental scienceGeographyComputer scienceRemote sensingComputer visionCartographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The DeepVision stereo camera system collects a continuous record of colour images of all fish passing inside the extension of a trawl. Ninety-eight percent of 1729 fish captured while trawling could be identified to species from images, and lengths could be estimated from the images of 96% of the fish identified. A landmark distance technique developed to estimate lengths from images containing incomplete, curved, or obscured fish introduced <1% error for the majority of individuals (maximum 5% error). The technology can greatly increase the scope of information collected during trawl sampling, including documenting fine-scale distribution of individual fish and species overlap. Such information can aid in interpreting acoustic data and fine-scale community composition and could be collected with an open codend trawl, greatly reducing sampling mortality. Images are easily archived, providing an opportunity to quality check the raw data and revisit datasets originally collected for different purposes. Adaptation of the technology for commercial fisheries could reduce the catch of unwanted species and sizes.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.006

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations62
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicWater Quality Monitoring TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207