MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413602327 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.70144

An active ensemble classifier for detecting animal sequences from global camera trap data

2025· article· en· W4413602327 on OpenAlexaff
Tommi Mononen, Bess Hardwick, Sandra Alcobia, Adrian Barrett, Gergin Blagoev, Stéphane Boyer, Paula Gonçalves, Brigitte Gottsberger, Elli Groner, Chris Ho, Markéta Tahadlová, Andrea Kaus‐Thiel, Irmgard Krisai‐Greilhüber, Valerie Levesque‐Beaudin, Carlos López‐Vaamonde, Sébastien Moreau, Anna Mrázová, Mikko Pentinsaari, Adrian Pinder, Kirsty Quinlan, Wolfram Remmers, Inês T. Rosário, Kateřina Sam, Margarida Santos‐Reis, Lucas Sire, Elise Sivault, Stefan Stoll, Patrick Strutzenberger, Lauren Vanderlingen, Tereza Vlasatá, Otso Ovaskainen

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsAssembly of First NationsUniversity of Guelph
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeBiotieteiden ja Ympäristön Tutkimuksen ToimikuntaGrantová Agentura České Republiky
KeywordsCamera trapClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceTrap (plumbing)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Ensemble learningGeographyBiologyEcologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Camera traps can generate huge amounts of images, and thus reliable methods for their automated processing are in high demand: in particular to find those images or image sequences that actually include animals. Automatically filtering out images that are empty or contain humans can be challenging, as images can be taken in different landscapes, habitats and light. Weather and seasonal conditions can vary greatly. Most of the images can be empty, because cameras using passive infrared sensors (PIR) trigger easily due to moving vegetation or rapidly varying shadows and sunny spots. Animals in images are often hiding behind vegetation, and camera traps will see them from previously unseen angles. Therefore, conventional animal image detection methods based on deep learning need huge training sets to achieve good accuracy. We present a novel background removal approach based on movement masked images computed using sequences of images. Our deep vision classifier uses these movement images for classification instead of the original images. Additionally, we apply a deep active learning (active learning for deep models) for collecting training samples to reduce the number of annotations required from the user. Our method performed well in singling out image sequences that actually include animals, thus filtering out the majority of images that were empty or contained humans. Most importantly, the method performed well also for backgrounds and animal species not seen in the training data. Active learning brought good separation between classes already with small training sets, without the need for laborious large‐scale pre‐annotation. We present a reliable and efficient method for filtering out empty image sequences and sequences containing humans. This greatly facilitates camera trapping research by enabling researchers to restrict the task of animal classification to only those image sequences that actually contain animals.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207