skip to main content
10.1145/2661821.2661826acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Are Species Identification Tools Biodiversity-friendly?

Published:07 November 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses the results of the LifeCLEF 2014 multimedia identification challenges with regards to the requirements of real-world ecological surveillance systems. In particular, we study the identification performances of the evaluated systems as a function of the ordinariness or rarity of the species in the dataset. This allows us to assess the ability of the underlying methods to be robust to heavily tailed distributions such as the ones encountered in real-world collections of life observations. Results show that all methods are more or less affected by the long-tail curse but that the best methods making use of classifiers with good discrimi- nation capacities do resist the phenomenon pretty well.

References

  1. MAED '12: Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Workshop on Multimedia Analysis for Ecological Data, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM. 433127.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. O. Barnich and M. Van Droogenbroeck. Vibe: A universal background subtraction algorithm for video sequences. Image Processing, IEEE Transactions on, 20(6):1709--1724, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J. Cai, D. Ee, B. Pham, P. Roe, and J. Zhang. Sensor network for the monitoring of ecosystem: Bird species recognition. In Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information, 2007. ISSNIP 2007. 3rd International Conference on, pages 293--298, Dec 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Q. Chen, M. Abedini, R. Garnavi, and X. Liang. Ibm research australia at lifeclef2014: Plant identification task. In Working notes of CLEF 2014 conference, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. Concetto, R. Fisher, and B. Boom. Lifeclef fish identification task 2014. In CLEF working notes 2014, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. J. Deng, W. Dong, R. Socher, L.-J. Li, K. Li, and L. Fei-Fei. ImageNet: A Large-Scale Hierarchical Image Database. In IEEE conference on Computer Vision and Patter Recognition, pages 248--245, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. H. Goëau, P. Bonnet, A. Joly, N. Boujemaa, D. Barthélémy, J.-F. Molino, P. Birnbaum, E. Mouysset, and M. Picard. The ImageCLEF 2011 plant images classification task. In CLEF working notes, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. H. Goëau, P. Bonnet, A. Joly, I. Yahiaoui, D. Barthelemy, N. Boujemaa, and J.-F. Molino. The ImageCLEF 2012 Plant Identification Task. In CLEF working notes, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. H. Goëau, H. Glotin, W.-P. Vellinga, A. Rauber, and R. Planqué. LifeCLEF Bird Identification Task 2014. In CLEF working notes 2014, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. H. Goëau, A. Joly, P. Bonnet, J.-F. Molino, D. Barthélémy, and N. Boujemaa. LifeCLEF Plant Identification Task 2014. In CLEF working notes 2014, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Proc. Neural Inform. Proc. Scaled for Bioacoustics, from Neurons to Big Data, 2013. http://sabiod.org/nips4b.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. A. Joly, H. Goeau, P. Bonnet, V. Bakić, J. Barbe, S. Selmi, I. Yahiaoui, J. Carré, E. Mouysset, J.-F. Molino, N. Boujemaa, and D. Barthélémy. Interactive plant identification based on social image data. Ecological Informatics, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. A. Joly, H. Goëau, P. Bonnet, V. Bakic, J.-F. Molino, D. Barthélémy, N. Boujemaa, et al. The imageclef plant identification task 2013. In International workshop on Multimedia analysis for ecological data, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. A. Joly, H. Müller, H. Goëau, H. Glotin, C. Spampinato, A. Rauber, P. Bonnet, W.-P. Vellinga, R. Fisher, and R. Planqué. Lifeclef 2014: multimedia life species identification challenges.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. M. Lasseck. Large-scale identification of birds in audio recordings. In Working notes of CLEF 2014 conference, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. D.-J. Lee, R. B. Schoenberger, D. Shiozawa, X. Xu, and P. Zhan. Contour matching for a fish recognition and migration-monitoring system. In Optics East, pages 37--48. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. M. J. Salganik, P. S. Dodds, and D. J. Watts. Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. science, 311(5762):854--856, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. C. Spampinato, Y.-H. Chen-Burger, G. Nadarajan, and R. B. Fisher. Detecting, tracking and counting fish in low quality unconstrained underwater videos. In VISAPP (2), pages 514--519. Citeseer, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. G. Szúcs, P. Dávid, and D. Lovas. Viewpoints combined classification method in image-based plant identification task. In Working notes of CLEF 2014 conference, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. M. Towsey, B. Planitz, A. Nantes, J. Wimmer, and P. Roe. A toolbox for animal call recognition. Bioacoustics, 21(2):107--125, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. V. M. Trifa, A. N. Kirschel, C. E. Taylor, and E. E. Vallejo. Automated species recognition of antbirds in a mexican rainforest using hidden markov models. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123:2424, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Are Species Identification Tools Biodiversity-friendly?

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          MAED '14: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Workshop on Multimedia Analysis for Ecological Data
          November 2014
          46 pages
          ISBN:9781450331234
          DOI:10.1145/2661821

          Copyright © 2014 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 7 November 2014

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          MAED '14 Paper Acceptance Rate6of11submissions,55%Overall Acceptance Rate13of23submissions,57%

          Upcoming Conference

          MM '24
          MM '24: The 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia
          October 28 - November 1, 2024
          Melbourne , VIC , Australia

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader