4.5 Article

Automatic classification of delphinids based on the representative frequencies of whistles

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
Volume 138, Issue 2, Pages 1003-1011

Publisher

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/1.4927695

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan [MOST 104-3113-E-002-012]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Classification of odontocete species remains a challenging task for passive acoustic monitoring. Classifiers that have been developed use spectral features extracted from echolocation clicks and whistle contours. Most of these contour-based classifiers require complete contours to reduce measurement errors. Therefore, overlapping contours and partially detected contours in an automatic detection algorithm may increase the bias for contour-based classifiers. In this study, classification was conducted on each recording section without extracting individual contours. The local-max detector was used to extract representative frequencies of delphinid whistles and each section was divided into multiple non-overlapping fragments. Three acoustical parameters were measured from the distribution of representative frequencies in each fragment. By using the statistical features of the acoustical parameters and the percentage of overlapping whistles, correct classification rate of 70.3% was reached for the recordings of seven species (Tursiops truncatus, Delphinus delphis, Delphinus capensis, Peponocephala electra, Grampus griseus, Stenella longirostris longirostris, and Stenella attenuata) archived in MobySound. org. In addition, correct classification rate was not dramatically reduced in various simulated noise conditions. This algorithm can be employed in acoustic observatories to classify different delphinid species and facilitate future studies on the community ecology of odontocetes. (C) 2015 Acoustical Society of America.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available