ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2023
Real-time biodiversity analysis using deep-learning algorithms on mobile robotic platforms.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward Precision Biodiversity Detection: An Edge-Deployable Framework for Mitigating Data Redundancy.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Aquatic Biodiversity Research: A PRISMA-Based Systematic Review.Biology · 2025Review
- Article
- Best practices for estimating and reporting epidemiological delay distributions of infectious diseases.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ecological biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate. To combat such irreversible changes in natural ecosystems, biodiversity conservation initiatives are being conducted globally. However, the lack of a feasible methodology to quantify biodiversity in real-time and investigate population dynamics in spatiotemporal scales prevents the use of ecological data in environmental planning. Traditionally, ecological studies rely on the census of an animal population by the "capture, mark and recapture" technique. In this technique, human field workers manually count, tag and observe tagged individuals, making it time-consuming, expensive, and cumbersome to patrol the entire area. Recent research has also demonstrated the potential for inexpensive and accessible sensors for ecological data monitoring. However, stationary sensors collect localised data which is highly specific on the placement of the setup. In this research, we propose the methodology for biodiversity monitoring utilising state-of-the-art deep learning (DL) methods operating in real-time on sample payloads of mobile robots. Such trained DL algorithms demonstrate a mean average precision (mAP) of 90.51% in an average inference time of 67.62 milliseconds within 6,000 training epochs. We claim that the use of such mobile platform setups inferring real-time ecological data can help us achieve our goal of quick and effective biodiversity surveys. An experimental test payload is fabricated, and online as well as offline field surveys are conducted, validating the proposed methodology for species identification that can be further extended to geo-localisation of flora and fauna in any ecosystem.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.