Automatic Analysis of Bees' Waggle Dance
Reece, J.; Couvillon, M. J.; Grueter, C.; Ratnieks, F.; Reyes-Aldasoro, C. C.
Show abstract
This work describe an algorithm for the automatic analysis of the waggle dance of honeybees. The algorithm analyses a video of a beehive with 13,624 frames, acquired at 25 frames/second. The algorithm employs the following traditional image processing steps: conversion to grayscale, low pass filtering, background subtraction, thresholding, tracking and clustering to detect run of bees that perform waggle dances. The algorithm detected 44,530 waggle events, i.e. one bee waggling in one time frame, which were then clustered into 511 waggle runs. Most of these were concentrated in one section of the hive. The accuracy of the tracking was 90% and a series of metrics like intra-dance variation in angle and duration were found to be consistent with literature. Whilst this algorithm was tested on a single video, the ideas and steps, which are simple as compared with Machine and Deep Learning techniques, should be attractive for researchers in this field who are not specialists in more complex techniques.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Tracking individual honeybees among wildflower clusters with computer vision-facilitated pollinator monitoring 97%
- Precise automatic classification of 46 different pollen types with convolutional neural networks 94%
- Utilizing CNNs for classification and uncertainty quantification for 15 families of European fly pollinators 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- An Assistive Computer Vision Tool to Automatically Detect Changes in Fish Behavior In Response to Ambient Odor 93%
- WormSwin: Instance segmentation of C. elegans using vision transformer 92%
- Computer vision and deep learning automates nocturnal rainforest ant tracking to provide insight into behavior and disease risk 92%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.