MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400285553 · doi:10.1121/10.0027487

Detecting ringed seal vocalizations in multiple environments using deep learning

2024· article· en· W4400285553 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karlee Zammit, William D. Halliday, Fábio Frazão, S. Fabbro, Stan Dosso

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityWildlife Conservation Society CanadaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeal (emblem)Computer scienceDeep learningArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning methods have recently been successfully applied to create a variety of automated acoustic detectors in the field of marine bioacoustics. Automated detectors are essential for analyzing large volumes of passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) data since manual analysis is prohibitively time-consuming and costly. PAM is the primary method for obtaining data on species which are endemic to remote regions, such as the Canadian Arctic. Arctic ringed seals are listed as a Species of Special Concern in Canada due to a loss of critical habitat caused by the effects of climate change. Here, ResNet, a convolutional neural network architecture, is trained on thousands of examples of ringed seal vocalizations recorded at various locations within the Canadian Arctic to create the first practical automated ringed seal detector. The network achieves a precision of 0.89, recall of 0.80, and F1 score of 0.85 when tested on 215 five-minute recordings from sites included in the training process. To improve the generalizability of the detector for new locations, fine-tuning is performed using a small subset of annotated data from new sites. The detector will be available as an open-source tool for researchers to use as the basis for further development of new automated detectors.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207