A deep learning approach to photo–identification demonstrates high performance on two dozen cetacean species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Researchers can investigate many aspects of animal ecology through noninvasive photo–identification. Photo–identification is becoming more efficient as matching individuals between photos is increasingly automated. However, the convolutional neural network models that have facilitated this change need many training images to generalize well. As a result, they have often been developed for individual species that meet this threshold. These single‐species methods might underperform, as they ignore potential similarities in identifying characteristics and the photo–identification process among species. In this paper, we introduce a multi‐species photo–identification model based on a state‐of‐the‐art method in human facial recognition, the ArcFace classification head. Our model uses two such heads to jointly classify species and identities, allowing species to share information and parameters within the network. As a demonstration, we trained this model with 50,796 images from 39 catalogues of 24 cetacean species, evaluating its predictive performance on 21,192 test images from the same catalogues. We further evaluated its predictive performance with two external catalogues entirely composed of identities that the model did not see during training. The model achieved a mean average precision (MAP) of 0.869 on the test set. Of these, 10 catalogues representing seven species achieved a MAP score over 0.95. For some species, there was notable variation in performance among catalogues, largely explained by variation in photo quality. Finally, the model appeared to generalize well, with the two external catalogues scoring similarly to their species' counterparts in the larger test set. From our cetacean application, we provide a list of recommendations for potential users of this model, focusing on those with cetacean photo–identification catalogues. For example, users with high quality images of animals identified by dorsal nicks and notches should expect near optimal performance. Users can expect decreasing performance for catalogues with higher proportions of indistinct individuals or poor quality photos. Finally, we note that this model is currently freely available as code in a GitHub repository and as a graphical user interface, with additional functionality for collaborative data management, via Happywhale.com.
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 | 0.002 | 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".