2023
DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2023.1071640
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A workflow for the automated detection and classification of female gibbon calls from long-term acoustic recordings

Abstract: Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) allows for the study of vocal animals on temporal and spatial scales difficult to achieve using only human observers. Recent improvements in recording technology, data storage, and battery capacity have led to increased use of PAM. One of the main obstacles in implementing wide-scale PAM programs is the lack of open-source programs that efficiently process terabytes of sound recordings and do not require large amounts of training data. Here we describe a workflow for detecting… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 111 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results show how our best performing model was effective at detecting high-quality H. albibarbis great calls with a low rate of false positive instances. The best performing model (F score: 0.87) exceeded previously reported SVM models for detecting gibbon vocalisations e.g., Hylobates funereus detector, F score: 0.78 (Clink et al 2023). It also performed comparatively to other CNN models, e.g., Nomascus hainanus detector, F score: 0.91 (Dufourq et al 2021), Nomascus concolor detector, F score: 0.92 (Zhou et al 2023).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 57%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The results show how our best performing model was effective at detecting high-quality H. albibarbis great calls with a low rate of false positive instances. The best performing model (F score: 0.87) exceeded previously reported SVM models for detecting gibbon vocalisations e.g., Hylobates funereus detector, F score: 0.78 (Clink et al 2023). It also performed comparatively to other CNN models, e.g., Nomascus hainanus detector, F score: 0.91 (Dufourq et al 2021), Nomascus concolor detector, F score: 0.92 (Zhou et al 2023).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…Hylobates funereus detector, F score: 0.78 (Clink et al 2023). It also performed comparatively to other CNN models, e.g., Nomascus hainanus detector, F score: 0.91 (Dufourq et al 2021),…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Other detectors may be more suitable for primate detection than BirdNET, and several are available (e.g., Clink & Klinck, 2019; Dufourq et al, 2021; Heinicke et al, 2015). The potentially substantial acoustic repertoires of some primates may warrant customized signal detection and classification solutions.…”
Section: Comparison and Critiquementioning
confidence: 99%