ArticleScientific reports2025
A novel target-oriented enhanced infrared camera trap data screening method.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Infrared Camera Traps (ICTs) are widely used in ecological research as a noninvasive wildlife monitoring technique, particularly for the detection and identification of animal targets. Existing ICT data screening methods face challenges in recognizing animals against complex backgrounds, particularly fast-moving or small targets. To address these issues, we proposed a target-oriented enhanced data-screening method called GFD-YOLO, which emphasized key locations in images to effectively guide the focus of the model toward target regions, thereby improving detection accuracy. We compared the effects of different preprocessing methods on detection performance. Results revealed that the proposed method improved the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 16.96%, precision by 10.13%, and recall by 24.85% compared to the YOLOv11n model. Therefore, the preprocessing method proposed in this study had significant advantages in reducing false negatives and false positives and was adaptable to wildlife detection tasks under different background conditions. In addition, this method demonstrated higher robustness in scenarios involving lighting variations and fast-moving targets.
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.