Comparison of a computer vision model to a human observer in detecting African mammals in camera trap images within a safari park
Davies Walsh, N.; Chalmers, C.; Fergus, P.; Longmore, S.; Johnson, B.; Wich, S.
Show abstract
Remote monitoring technologies are increasingly utilized in animal research for their capacity to enhance data collection efficiency. However, they present challenges, and as such researchers have resorted to utilizing deep learning to automatically classify acquired data therefore expediting the review process. While this practice is common in field studies it has been less adopted in zoo monitoring. In this paper we deploy the YOLOv10x model to monitor four species at Knowsley Safari in the UK: African lions (Panthera leo), Southern white rhino (Ceratotherium simum simum), Grevys zebra (Equus grevyi) and Olive baboons (Papio anubis). Camera trap images were processed and classified using the Conservation AI desktop application. The raw images were saved to facilitate the comparative analysis of the models predictions against the findings of human observed images. Processing time for both methods was compared using a subset of 3015 images with Conservation AI, reducing the time required to classify the images by 82% compared to a human analyst. Confusion matrix results showed high accuracy rates for all four species (>0.90). Analysis of count data showed significant differences in three species, where the human observer recorded more observations of each than Conservation AI (lion, rhino, baboon p<0.005). However, no significant difference was seen in zebra (p>0.05). A strong positive correlation in count data between both methodologies was seen in all species; baboon (rho=0.955, p<0.005), lion (rho = 0.969, p<0.005), rhino (rho=0.887, p<0.005) and zebra (rho=0.843, p<0.005). This study highlights the potential for these technologies as a monitoring system in zoos.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Deep learning-based methods for individual recognition in small birds 95%
- Real-time alerts from AI-enabled camera traps using the Iridium satellite network: a case-study in Gabon, Central Africa 94%
- Thinking like a naturalist: enhancing computer vision of citizen science images by harnessing contextual data 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Impact evaluation of score classes and annotation regions in deep learning-based dairy cow body condition prediction 92%
- Welfare at group and individual level: optical flow patterns of broiler chicken flocks are correlated with the behaviour of individual birds 92%
- Modelling the deathbed of ASF-infected wild boars in South Korea using 2019-2020 national surveillance data 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Machine learning goes wild: Using data from captive individuals to infer wildlife behaviour 94%
- Utilizing CNNs for classification and uncertainty quantification for 15 families of European fly pollinators 93%
- Tracking individual honeybees among wildflower clusters with computer vision-facilitated pollinator monitoring 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparison of Two Individual Identification Algorithms for Snow Leopards (Panthera uncia) after Automated Detection 95%
- Exploiting facial side similarities to improve AI-driven sea turtle photo-identification systems 93%
- Insect Size Matters: Using Image and Dimensions Together Improves Image Classification 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Multi-Object Tracking in Heterogeneous environments (MOTHe) for animal video recordings 94%
- Standardization and validation of a panel of cross-species microsatellites to individually identify the Asiatic wild dog (Cuon alpinus): implications in population estimation and dynamics 92%
- Does novelty influence foraging decision of a scavenger? 92%
"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.