2016
DOI: 10.1007/s11263-016-0961-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automated Visual Fin Identification of Individual Great White Sharks

Abstract: This paper discusses the automated visual identification of individual great white sharks from dorsal fin imagery. We propose a computer vision photo ID system and report recognition results over a database of thousands of unconstrained fin images. To the best of our knowledge this line of work establishes the first fully automated contour-based visual ID system in the field of animal biometrics. The approach put forward appreciates shark fins as textureless, flexible and partially occluded objects with an ind… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
34
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
(73 reference statements)
1
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…AMWR's test precision (74%) and recall (80%) results (last column of Table 1) were better than the corresponding state-of-the-art gorilla identification results [11] of approximately 60%. The AMWR's test accuracy (93%) and precision (74%) were comparable to the 81% average precision achieved in the state-of-the-art great white shark identification results [9]. The validation and test prediction metrics were comparable (third and fourth columns in Table 1) supporting the achieved testvalues to be the expected benchmark/baseline values of the AMWR model in future similar circumstances/studies.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 64%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…AMWR's test precision (74%) and recall (80%) results (last column of Table 1) were better than the corresponding state-of-the-art gorilla identification results [11] of approximately 60%. The AMWR's test accuracy (93%) and precision (74%) were comparable to the 81% average precision achieved in the state-of-the-art great white shark identification results [9]. The validation and test prediction metrics were comparable (third and fourth columns in Table 1) supporting the achieved testvalues to be the expected benchmark/baseline values of the AMWR model in future similar circumstances/studies.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 64%
“…Similarly, all available 36 MW1020 validation images were used with 36 randomly selected negative validation images, where a new random selection of 36 negative images was done before each training cycle. Also due to the highly unbalanced number of positive and negative examples, AMWR classifier was assessed via precision, recall, fprate (false-positive), in addition to the standard accuracy [9] [11] [27],…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In contrast to purely fine-grained category recognition, we are interested in the identification of individual animals [16,26] (or instances) of a single species (or category) rather than highly similar categories. Whilst animal biometrics [36] may operate on a wide variety of entities to achieve identification, our technical focus of the review will be solely on techniques applicable to facial identification.…”
Section: Automated Detection and Identificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [11], the authors propose a trailing edge indexing algorithm and apply it to great white sharks. After defining keypoints for feature extraction by convolving the contour with a Difference-of-Gaussian kernel, they explore the use of both the Difference-of-Gaussian norm and the descriptor from [2].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%