ArticlePloS one2025
Evaluating the performance of automated detection systems for long-term monitoring of delphinids in diverse marine soundscapes.
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.
- Multi-Scale Temporal Patterns of Small Cetacean Behaviour in the Bay of Biscay.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is an increasing reliance on passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) as a cost-effective method for monitoring cetaceans, necessitating robust and efficient automated tools for extracting species presence. This work compares two methods, one based on the 'off-line' analysis of raw PAM data, using Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), and the second based on in-situ detections, implemented within the C-POD. The C-POD is a rapid, low-cost choice for monitoring of odontocetes, while CNNs, requiring large efforts to train, are gaining traction within bioacoustics as they offer performance benefits above standard detection and classification tools. This work represents the first empirical comparison of a C-POD with a system using a CNN on recorded raw acoustic data for monitoring delphinids. The comparison is based on 3000 hours of PAM data, collected off the west coast of Scotland, using a collocated C-POD and SoundTrap acoustic recorder. Results show that the system using a CNN achieves an overall accuracy of 0.82, and an effectiveness (F1-Score) of 0.78 as a click detector, whilst the C-POD achieves scores of 0.71 and 0.62, respectively. The method employing a CNN provides a lower missed detection rate, with the C-POD failing to detect > 90% delphinid positive hours at one focal site. However, the C-POD offered a lower false-positive rate across all analysis sites. This work highlights the importance of incorporating the right automated tools for long-term species monitoring, as the C-POD offers high precision rates for click detections, while the CNN based system provides a robust approach to identifying seasonal and diurnal trends in long-term dolphin occurrence.
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.