Performance Comparison of Five Methods Available in ImageJ for Bird Counting and Detection from Video Datasets

IF 2.1 Q2 ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Inventions Pub Date : 2024-05-09 DOI:10.3390/inventions9030055
K. Kurnia, Ferry Saputra, Cao Thang Luong, M. J. Roldan, Tai-Sheng Cheng, Chung-Der Hsiao
{"title":"Performance Comparison of Five Methods Available in ImageJ for Bird Counting and Detection from Video Datasets","authors":"K. Kurnia, Ferry Saputra, Cao Thang Luong, M. J. Roldan, Tai-Sheng Cheng, Chung-Der Hsiao","doi":"10.3390/inventions9030055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bird monitoring is an important approach to studying the diversity and abundance of birds, especially during migration, as it can provide core data for bird conservation purposes. The previous methods for bird number estimation are largely based on manual counting, which suffers from low throughput and a high error rate. In this study, we aimed to provide an alternative bird-counting method from video datasets by using five available ImageJ methods: Particle Analyzer, Find Maxima, Watershed segmentation, TrackMate, and trainable WEKA segmentation. The numbers of birds and their XY coordinates were extracted from videos to conduct a side-by-side comparison with the manual counting results, and the three important criteria of the sensitivity, precision, and F1 score were calculated for the performance evaluation. From the tests, which we conducted for four different cases with different bird numbers or flying patterns, TrackMate had the best overall performance for counting birds and pinpointing their locations, followed by Particle Analyzer, Find Maxima, WEKA, and lastly, Watershed, which showed low precision in most of the cases. In summary, five ImageJ-based counting methods were compared in this study, and we validated that TrackMate obtains the best performance for bird counting and detection.","PeriodicalId":14564,"journal":{"name":"Inventions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/inventions9030055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Bird monitoring is an important approach to studying the diversity and abundance of birds, especially during migration, as it can provide core data for bird conservation purposes. The previous methods for bird number estimation are largely based on manual counting, which suffers from low throughput and a high error rate. In this study, we aimed to provide an alternative bird-counting method from video datasets by using five available ImageJ methods: Particle Analyzer, Find Maxima, Watershed segmentation, TrackMate, and trainable WEKA segmentation. The numbers of birds and their XY coordinates were extracted from videos to conduct a side-by-side comparison with the manual counting results, and the three important criteria of the sensitivity, precision, and F1 score were calculated for the performance evaluation. From the tests, which we conducted for four different cases with different bird numbers or flying patterns, TrackMate had the best overall performance for counting birds and pinpointing their locations, followed by Particle Analyzer, Find Maxima, WEKA, and lastly, Watershed, which showed low precision in most of the cases. In summary, five ImageJ-based counting methods were compared in this study, and we validated that TrackMate obtains the best performance for bird counting and detection.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
ImageJ 中用于从视频数据集计数和检测鸟类的五种方法的性能比较
鸟类监测是研究鸟类多样性和数量的重要方法,尤其是在迁徙期间,因为它可以为鸟类保护提供核心数据。以往估算鸟类数量的方法主要基于人工计数,这种方法存在吞吐量低、错误率高的问题。在本研究中,我们旨在通过使用五种可用的 ImageJ 方法,为视频数据集提供另一种鸟类计数方法:Particle Analyzer、Find Maxima、Watershed segmentation、TrackMate 和可训练的 WEKA segmentation。我们从视频中提取了鸟类的数量及其 XY 坐标,与人工计数结果进行了并列比较,并计算了灵敏度、精确度和 F1 分数这三个重要的性能评估标准。我们针对鸟类数量或飞行模式不同的四种不同情况进行了测试,结果表明 TrackMate 在计数鸟类和精确定位鸟类位置方面的总体性能最佳,其次是 Particle Analyzer、Find Maxima、WEKA,最后是 Watershed,后者在大多数情况下精度较低。总之,本研究比较了五种基于 ImageJ 的计数方法,并验证了 TrackMate 在鸟类计数和检测方面的最佳性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Inventions
Inventions Engineering-Engineering (all)
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
11.80%
发文量
91
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
PI3SO: A Spectroscopic γ-Ray Scanner Table for Sort and Segregate Radwaste Analysis Aircraft Innovation Trends Enabling Advanced Air Mobility The Effect of Individual Hydrocarbons in the Composition of Diesel Fuel on the Effectiveness of Depressant Additives A Review of Available Solutions for Implementation of Small–Medium Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Systems Real-Time Precision in 3D Concrete Printing: Controlling Layer Morphology via Machine Vision and Learning Algorithms
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1