4.5 Article

Robust North Atlantic right whale detection using deep learning models for denoisinga)

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
卷 149, 期 6, 页码 3797-3812

出版社

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/10.0005128

关键词

-

资金

  1. Nvidia Corporation
  2. Next Generation Unmanned Systems Science (NEXUSS) Centre for Doctoral Training, Gardline Geosurvey

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study proposes a robust system for detecting North Atlantic right whales by using deep learning to denoise noisy recordings. Evaluations show that denoising substantially improves accuracy in detecting right whales.
This paper proposes a robust system for detecting North Atlantic right whales by using deep learning methods to denoise noisy recordings. Passive acoustic recordings of right whale vocalisations are subject to noise contamination from many sources, such as shipping and offshore activities. When such data are applied to uncompensated classifiers, accuracy falls substantially. To build robustness into the detection process, two separate approaches that have proved successful for image denoising are considered. Specifically, a denoising convolutional neural network and a denoising autoencoder, each of which is applied to spectrogram representations of the noisy audio signal, are developed. Performance is improved further by matching the classifier training to include the vestigial signal that remains in clean estimates after the denoising process. Evaluations are performed first by adding white, tanker, trawler, and shot noises at signal-to-noise ratios from -10 to +5 dB to clean recordings to simulate noisy conditions. Experiments show that denoising gives substantial improvements to accuracy, particularly when using the vestigial-trained classifier. A final test applies the proposed methods to previously unseen noisy right whale recordings and finds that denoising is able to improve performance over the baseline clean-trained model in this new noise environment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据