Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38139515›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Intelligent Detection Method for Wildlife Based on Deep Learning.

Shuang Li, Haiyan Zhang, Fu Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Shuang LiSchool of Information Science and Technology, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China.
Haiyan ZhangSchool of Information Science and Technology, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China.
Fu XuSchool of Information Science and Technology, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China.

Funding

Outstanding Youth Team Project of Central Universities QNTD202308The Emergency Open Competition Project of National Forestry and Grassland Administration 202303the National Key R&D Program of China 2022YFF1302700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wildlife is an important part of natural ecosystems and protecting wildlife plays a crucial role in maintaining ecological balance. The wildlife detection method for images and videos based on deep learning can save a lot of labor costs and is of great significance and value for the monitoring and protection of wildlife. However, the complex and changing outdoor environment often leads to less than satisfactory detection results due to insufficient lighting, mutual occlusion, and blurriness. The TMS-YOLO (Takin, Monkey, and Snow Leopard-You Only Look Once) proposed in this paper is a modification of YOLOv7, specifically optimized for wildlife detection. It uses the designed O-ELAN (Optimized Efficient Layer Aggregation Networks) and O-SPPCSPC (Optimized Spatial Pyramid Pooling Combined with Cross Stage Partial Channel) modules and incorporates the CBAM (Convolutional Block Attention Module) to enhance its suitability for this task. In simple terms, O-ELAN can preserve a portion of the original features through residual structures when extracting image features, resulting in more background and animal features. However, O-ELAN may include more background information in the extracted features. Therefore, we use CBAM after the backbone to suppress background features and enhance animal features. Then, when fusing the features, we use O-SPPCSPC with fewer network layers to avoid overfitting. Comparative experiments were conducted on a self-built dataset and a Turkish wildlife dataset. The results demonstrated that the enhanced TMS-YOLO models outperformed YOLOv7 on both datasets. The mAP (mean Average Precision) of YOLOv7 on the two datasets was 90.5% and 94.6%, respectively. In contrast, the mAP of TMS-YOLO in the two datasets was 93.4% and 95%, respectively. These findings indicate that TMS-YOLO can achieve more accurate wildlife detection compared to YOLOv7.

Indexed as

Animals, WildDeep LearningAnimalsEcosystemIntelligenceVideotape Recordingdeep learningobject detectionTMS-YOLOwildlife

Identifiers

PMID38139515
PMCPMC10747703

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.