2010
DOI: 10.1899/09-080.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automated processing and identification of benthic invertebrate samples

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
57
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
57
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Automated insect species identification presents several chal- lenges, such as small inter-species differences due to closely related species and significant intra-species variation due to changes in position, orientation, pose, and variations in developmental and degradation stages overcome by our method. Our set of experiments with 29 insect taxa are more ambitious in scope than previous studies [9,12,13] with 9 taxa and show promise for real-world automated biomonitoring systems. The spatial-pyramid kernel classifiers achieve higher classification rates than the random trees and RBF kernel classifiers, reaching a similar performance with just a single type of feature.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Automated insect species identification presents several chal- lenges, such as small inter-species differences due to closely related species and significant intra-species variation due to changes in position, orientation, pose, and variations in developmental and degradation stages overcome by our method. Our set of experiments with 29 insect taxa are more ambitious in scope than previous studies [9,12,13] with 9 taxa and show promise for real-world automated biomonitoring systems. The spatial-pyramid kernel classifiers achieve higher classification rates than the random trees and RBF kernel classifiers, reaching a similar performance with just a single type of feature.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In [9,12,13] experiments on nine stonefly taxa (Plecoptera) obtained very low classification errors. Earlier research [8] from the same group of authors evaluated the feasibility of automated stonefly species identification with existing computer vision and machine learning methods.…”
Section: Insect-species Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Computer vision technologies can support the study of a variety of animal populations in their natural environment [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. However, the technical constraints of insitu video monitoring yield potential errors in the extracted data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 Species often swimming in and out cameras' field of view are over-estimated. 4 Fish in groups occlude each other and are under-estimated. 5 Large granularity of nets' and fish traps' mesh can let small fish slip through.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, identification process is made manually by biologists or taxonomists. Automated benthic macroinvertebrate identification [6]- [10], [12]- [14], [16], [17], [19], [20] has gained a scant attention among computer scientists, but it can save resources and enable wider and more efficient biomonitoring.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%