论文标题

选择合适的平台和工作流,用于使用人工智能处理相机陷阱数据

Choosing an Appropriate Platform and Workflow for Processing Camera Trap Data using Artificial Intelligence

论文作者

Vélez, Juliana, Castiblanco-Camacho, Paula J., Tabak, Michael A., Chalmers, Carl, Fergus, Paul, Fieberg, John

论文摘要

相机陷阱改变了生态学家如何研究野生动植物物种分布,活动模式和种间相互作用。尽管相机陷阱为监测物种提供了一种具有成本效益的方法,但数据处理所需的时间可以限制调查效率。因此,人工智能(AI),特别是深度学习(DL)的潜力引起了很多关注。将DL用于这些应用涉及训练算法,例如卷积神经网络(CNN),以自动检测对象并分类物种。为了克服与培训CNN相关的技术挑战,一些研究社区最近开发了将DL纳入易于使用的接口的平台。我们回顾了四个AI驱动平台的关键特征 - 野生动物洞察(WI),Megadetector(MD),野生动物图像分类的机器学习(MLWIC2)和保护AI,包括数据管理工具和AI功能。我们还将在开源GitBook中提供R代码,以演示用户如何评估模型性能,并将AI输出纳入半自动化工作流程中。我们发现来自WI和MLWIC2的物种分类通常具有低召回值(图像中存在的动物通常未分类为正确的物种)。然而,某些物种的WI和MLWIC2分类的精度很高(即,当进行分类时,通常是准确的)。 MD使用更广泛的类别(例如“空白”或“动物”)对图像进行了分类。因此,我们得出的结论是,尽管物种分类器不足以自动化图像处理,但DL可用于通过接受某些物种具有较高置信值的分类或通过过滤包含空白的图像来提高效率。

Camera traps have transformed how ecologists study wildlife species distributions, activity patterns, and interspecific interactions. Although camera traps provide a cost-effective method for monitoring species, the time required for data processing can limit survey efficiency. Thus, the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI), specifically Deep Learning (DL), to process camera-trap data has gained considerable attention. Using DL for these applications involves training algorithms, such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), to automatically detect objects and classify species. To overcome technical challenges associated with training CNNs, several research communities have recently developed platforms that incorporate DL in easy-to-use interfaces. We review key characteristics of four AI-powered platforms -- Wildlife Insights (WI), MegaDetector (MD), Machine Learning for Wildlife Image Classification (MLWIC2), and Conservation AI -- including data management tools and AI features. We also provide R code in an open-source GitBook, to demonstrate how users can evaluate model performance, and incorporate AI output in semi-automated workflows. We found that species classifications from WI and MLWIC2 generally had low recall values (animals that were present in the images often were not classified to the correct species). Yet, the precision of WI and MLWIC2 classifications for some species was high (i.e., when classifications were made, they were generally accurate). MD, which classifies images using broader categories (e.g., "blank" or "animal"), also performed well. Thus, we conclude that, although species classifiers were not accurate enough to automate image processing, DL could be used to improve efficiencies by accepting classifications with high confidence values for certain species or by filtering images containing blanks.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源