ArticlePloS one2025
MADNet: Marine Animal Detection Network using the YOLO platform.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
It is necessary to overcome the real-life challenges encountered in detecting marine animals in underwater bodies through computer vision for monitoring their populations and biological data. At the same time, the detectors for such tasks are limited by large parameters, high computation costs, low accuracy, low speed, and unfriendly deployment in low-power computing devices due to their large size. To tackle these problems, MADNet was developed using the YOLO framework, incorporating both anchor-based and anchor-free techniques. The structure of MADNet includes CBS, C3b, Bottleneck, SPPFr, and C3 modules, and it was evaluated against YOLOv5n, YOLOv6n, YOLOv7-tiny, and YOLOv8n with consistent application methods on various open-source underwater image datasets. Using the computation cost, trained time, loss, accuracy, speed, and mean absolute error (MAE) as performance evaluation metrics, the anchor-free methods performed better than the anchor-based methods. Similarly, the overall performance score for MADNet was analyzed at 27.8%, which is higher than 20% for YOLOv8n, 18.9% for YOLOv6n, 17.8% for YOLOv5n, and 15.6% for YOLOv7-tiny. As a result, MADNet is lightweight and effective for detecting marine animals in challenging underwater scenarios.
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.