MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210926750 · doi:10.1101/2022.02.07.479461

CameraTrapDetectoR: Automatically detect, classify, and count animals in camera trap images using artificial intelligence

2022· preprint· en· W4210926750 on OpenAlexaff
Michael A. Tabak, Daniel Falbel, Tess Hamzeh, Ryan K. Brook, John A. Goolsby, Lisa D. Zoromski, Raoul K. Boughton, Nathan P. Snow, Kurt C. VerCauteren, Ryan S. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanNational Capital Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCamera trapArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceBounding overwatchComputer visionMinimum bounding boxDeep learningObject (grammar)WildlifePattern recognition (psychology)Class (philosophy)Image (mathematics)EcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Motion-activated wildlife cameras, or camera traps, are widely used in biological monitoring of wildlife. Studies using camera traps amass large numbers of images and analyzing these images can be a large burden that inhibits research progress. We trained deep learning computer vision models using data for 168 species that automatically detect, count, and classify common North American domestic and wild species in camera trap images. We provide our trained models in an R package, CameraTrapDetectoR. Three types of models are available: a taxonomic class model classifies objects as mammal (human and non-human) or avian; a taxonomic family model that recognizes 31 mammal, avian, and reptile families; a species model that recognizes 75 domestic and wild species including all North American wild cat species, bear species, and Canid species. Each model also includes a category for vehicles and empty images. The models performed well on both validation datasets and out-of-distribution testing datasets as mean average precision values ranged from 0.80 to 0.96. CameraTrapDetectoR provides predictions as an R object (a data frame) and flat file and provides the option to create plots of the original camera trap image with the predicted bounding box and label. There is also the option to apply models using a Shiny Application, with a point-and-click graphical user interface. This R package has the potential to facilitate application of deep learning models by biologists using camera traps.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207