In:
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Acoustical Society of America (ASA), Vol. 141, No. 5_Supplement ( 2017-05-01), p. 3604-3605
Abstract:
Automated detectors are important tools for processing large passive acoustic databases. Assessing the performance of a given method can be challenging and needs to be interpreted in the light of the overall purpose of analysis. Performance evaluation often involves comparison between the detector output and a ground-truth data set, which often involves manual analyses of the data. Such analyses may be subjective depending on, e.g., interfering background noise conditions. In this study, we investigated the variability between two analysts in the detection of Antarctic blue whale Z-calls (Balaenoptera musculus intermedia), as well as the intra-analyst variability, in order to understand how this variability impacts the creation of a ground-truth and the assessment of detector performances. Analyses were conducted on two test datasets reflecting two basins and different situations of call abundance and background noise conditions. Using a ground-truth based on combined results of both analysts, we evaluated the performances of two automated detectors, one using spectrogram correlation and the other using a subspace-detection strategy. This evaluation allows understanding how recording sites, vocal activity, and interfering sounds affect the detector performances and highlights the advantages and limitations of each of the methods, and the possible solutions to overcome the main limitations.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0001-4966
,
1520-8524
Language:
English
Publisher:
Acoustical Society of America (ASA)
Publication Date:
2017
detail.hit.zdb_id:
1461063-2
Permalink
