ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Novelty Recognition: Fish Species Classification via Open-Set Recognition.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To support the sustainable use of marine resources, regulations have been proposed to reduce fish discards focusing on the registration of all listed species. To comply with such regulations, computer vision methods have been developed. Nevertheless, current approaches are constrained by their closed-set nature, where they are designed only to recognize fish species that were present during training. In the real world, however, samples of unknown fish species may appear in different fishing regions or seasons, requiring fish classification to be treated as an open-set problem. This work focuses on the assessment of open-set recognition to automate the registration process of fish. The state-of-the-art Multiple Gaussian Prototype Learning (MGPL) was compared with the simple yet powerful Open-Set Nearest Neighbor (OSNN) and the Probability of Inclusion Support Vector Machine (PISVM). For the experiments, the Fish Detection and Weight Estimation dataset, containing images of 2216 fish instances from nine species, was used. Experimental results demonstrated that OSNN and PISVM outperformed MGPL in both recognizing known and unknown species. OSNN achieved the best results when classifying samples as either one of the known species or as an unknown species with an F1-macro of 0.79±0.05 and an AUROC score of 0.92±0.01 surpassing PISVM by 0.05 and 0.03, respectively.
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.