MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889020395 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2018.8447682

Deep Learning for Marine Resources Classification in Non-Structured Scenarios: Training vs. Transfer Learning

2018· article· en· W2889020395 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersNature Conservancy
KeywordsTransfer of learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceDeep learningContextual image classificationPattern recognition (psychology)Fish <Actinopterygii>FishingImage (mathematics)Machine learningFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes the use of Deep learning for Marine Resources classification (DeepMaRe), especially the classification of fish images captured in non-structured scenarios. Tests conducted using two state of the art deep CNN architectures show that Deep learning can be used efficiently in this type of classifications. AlexNet and GoogLeNet were both used to classify the images captured onboard of fishing boats. The best results were obtained using transfer learning and pretrained models. Using this strategy, AlexNet and GoogLeNet achieve respectively a success rate of 94.01% and 96.01%. These results are further improved by extracting and using fish areas for training and classification. The accuracy of cropped fish areas classification obtained 96.35% with AlexNet and 96.54% with GoogLeNet. Also, the top-2 accuracy obtained by GoogLeNet was equal to 97.87% for the full image classification and 98.94% for the cropped images.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Quality Monitoring TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207