Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33785056›Full record

ArticleMovement ecology2021

An evaluation of machine learning classifiers for next-generation, continuous-ethogram smart trackers.

Hui Yu, Jian Deng, Ran Nathan, Max Kröschel, Sasha Pekarsky, Guozheng Li, Marcel Klaassen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Movement ecology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Hui YuCentre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Jian DengDruid Technology Co., Ltd, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Ran NathanThe Movement Ecology Laboratory, Department of Evolution, Systematics, and Ecology, Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Max KröschelDepartment of Wildlife Ecology, Forest Research Institute of Baden-Württemberg, Freiburg, Germany.
Sasha PekarskyThe Movement Ecology Laboratory, Department of Evolution, Systematics, and Ecology, Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Guozheng LiDruid Technology Co., Ltd, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. liguozheng@druid.tech.
Marcel KlaassenCentre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOur understanding of movement patterns and behaviours of wildlife has advanced greatly through the use of improved tracking technologies, including application of accelerometry (ACC) across a wide range of taxa. However, most ACC studies either use intermittent sampling that hinders continuity or continuous data logging relying on tracker retrieval for data downloading which is not applicable for long term study. To allow long-term, fine-scale behavioural research, we evaluated a range of machine learning methods for their suitability for continuous on-board classification of ACC data into behaviour categories prior to data transmission.

methodsWe tested six supervised machine learning methods, including linear discriminant analysis (LDA), decision tree (DT), support vector machine (SVM), artificial neural network (ANN), random forest (RF) and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) to classify behaviour using ACC data from three bird species (white stork Ciconia ciconia, griffon vulture Gyps fulvus and common crane Grus grus) and two mammals (dairy cow Bos taurus and roe deer Capreolus capreolus).

resultsUsing a range of quality criteria, SVM, ANN, RF and XGBoost performed well in determining behaviour from ACC data and their good performance appeared little affected when greatly reducing the number of input features for model training. On-board runtime and storage-requirement tests showed that notably ANN, RF and XGBoost would make suitable on-board classifiers.

conclusionsOur identification of using feature reduction in combination with ANN, RF and XGBoost as suitable methods for on-board behavioural classification of continuous ACC data has considerable potential to benefit movement ecology and behavioural research, wildlife conservation and livestock husbandry.

Indexed as

AccelerometerANNBehaviour classificationOn-board processingRandom forestXGBoost

Identifiers

PMID33785056
PMCPMC8011142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.