Visible and thermal infrared remote sensing for the detection of white‐tailed deer using an unmanned aerial system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Wildlife management is based on various measurements representative of the health of populations and their habitats. Some agencies are focusing on animal surveys to manage species such as white‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ). Current survey methods are faced with the challenge of reduced operating costs as well as estimating and correcting detection biases. Our pilot study (data collected on 6 Nov 2012 at Saint‐David‐de‐Falardeau, QC, Canada) assessed the potential of a new approach detect and count deer based on visible and thermal infrared image processing at very‐high spatial resolutions using an unmanned aerial system (UAS). Supervised and unsupervised pixel‐based image classification approaches as well as object‐based image analysis (OBIA) were assessed for different spatial resolutions and with different combinations of spectral bands. None of the pixel‐based approaches were effective for detecting deer. The OBIA approach detected deer with a rate of up to 100% under the best conditions by using a combination of visible and thermal infrared imagery at a spatial resolution of 0.8 cm/pixel. Overall, this approach had an average detection rate of 0.5, which is comparable to conventional aerial surveys. Visual obstructions by coniferous canopy and the spectral confusion associated with certain elements (e.g., bare soil, rocks) are problems that remain unresolved. Using UASs with image processing for surveys of deer and other species of large mammals is promising, but currently limited by the flight range of unmanned aerial vehicles and the associated regulations. © 2016 The Wildlife Society.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".