21 000 birds in 4.5 h: efficient large‐scale seabird detection with machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We address the task of automatically detecting and counting seabirds in unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) imagery using deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs). Our study area, the coast of West Africa, harbours significant breeding colonies of terns and gulls, which as top predators in the food web function as important bioindicators for the health of the marine ecosystem. Surveys to estimate breeding numbers have hitherto been carried out on foot, which is tedious, imprecise and causes disturbance. By using UAVs and CNNs that allow localizing tens of thousands of birds automatically, we show that all three limitations can be addressed elegantly. As we employ a lightweight CNN architecture and incorporate prior knowledge about the spatial distribution of birds within the colonies, we were able to reduce the number of bird annotations required for CNN training to just 200 examples per class. Our model obtains good accuracy for the most abundant species of royal terns (90% precision at 90% recall), but is less accurate for the rarer Caspian terns and gull species (60% precision at 68% recall, respectively 20% precision at 88% recall), which amounts to around 7% of all individuals present. In sum, our results show that we can detect and classify the majority of 21 000 birds in just 4.5 h, start to finish, as opposed to about 3 weeks of tediously identifying and labelling all birds by hand.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".