MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156947595 · doi:10.1002/rse2.201

Automated detection of Hainan gibbon calls for passive acoustic monitoring

2021· article· en· W3156947595 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGlobal Affairs CanadaAfrican Institute for Mathematical SciencesDivision of Mathematical SciencesGovernment of CanadaUniversiteit StellenboschNational Research FoundationInternational Development Research CentreArcus Foundation
KeywordsPreprocessorBioacousticsComputer scienceSpectrogramConvolutional neural networkClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Extracting species calls from passive acoustic recordings is a common preliminary step to ecological analysis. For many species, particularly those occupying noisy, acoustically variable habitats, the call extraction process continues to be largely manual, a time‐consuming and increasingly unsustainable process. Deep neural networks have been shown to offer excellent performance across a range of acoustic classification applications, but are relatively underused in ecology. We describe the steps involved in developing an automated classifier for a passive acoustic monitoring project, using the identification of calls of the Hainan gibbon Nomascus hainanus , one of the world's rarest mammal species, as a case study. This includes preprocessing—selecting a temporal resolution, windowing and annotation; data augmentation; processing—choosing and fitting appropriate neural network models; and post‐processing—linking model predictions to replace, or more likely facilitate, manual labelling. Our best model converted acoustic recordings into spectrogram images on the mel frequency scale, using these to train a convolutional neural network. Model predictions were highly accurate, with per‐second false positive and false negative rates of 1.5% and 22.3%. Nearly all false negatives were at the fringes of calls, adjacent to segments where the call was correctly identified, so that very few calls were missed altogether. A post‐processing step identifying intervals of repeated calling reduced an 8‐h recording to, on average, 22 min for manual processing, and did not miss any calling bouts over 72 h of test recordings. Gibbon calling bouts were detected regularly in multi‐month recordings from all selected survey points within Bawangling National Nature Reserve, Hainan. We demonstrate that passive acoustic monitoring incorporating an automated classifier represents an effective tool for remote detection of one of the world's rarest and most threatened species. Our study highlights the viability of using neural networks to automate or greatly assist the manual labelling of data collected by passive acoustic monitoring projects. We emphasize that model development and implementation be informed and guided by ecological objectives, and increase accessibility of these tools with a series of notebooks that allow users to build and deploy their own acoustic classifiers.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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