ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Underwater Computer Vision for Ecologists: A Framework for Curating Image Training Datasets for Object Detection.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As marine ecosystems experience accelerating change, there is an urgent need for efficient and scalable biodiversity monitoring tools. We present a 10-step framework for integrating computer vision (CV) tools into long-term underwater biodiversity monitoring, using a case study from coastal British Columbia. Over 9000 h of unbaited remote underwater video footage were collected from two kelp farms and reference sites between March 2022 and June 2023. The framework includes steps for creating an annotated training dataset using unsupervised and supervised CV tools, culminating in the training and validation of a YOLOv8 object detection model. This process produced over 241,000 annotations across 54 pseudo-taxonomic categories (representing both taxa and visually similar groups of fauna), with a focus on fish and gelatinous zooplankton groups. The final model achieved an overall F1 (2 × precision × recall/(precision + recall)) of 0.74 and a mean average precision at 0.5 intersection over union (mAP50) of 0.78. The model had the highest performance on fine-resolution taxa such as
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.