Cited by 104Video Surveillance and Tracking MethodsWildlife Ecology and ConservationFace recognition and analysis

Perspectives on Individual Animal Identification from Biology and Computer Vision

Open access
Vidal, Maxime, Wolf, Nathan, Rosenberg, Beth, Harris, Bradley P, Mathis, Alexander·2021·Integrative and Comparative Biology

Abstract

Synopsis: Identifying individual animals is crucial for many biological investigations. In response to some of the limitations of current identification methods, new automated computer vision approaches have emerged with strong performance. Here, we review current advances of computer vision identification techniques to provide both computer scientists and biologists with an overview of the available tools and discuss their applications. We conclude by offering recommendations for starting an animal identification project, illustrate current limitations, and propose how they might be addressed in the future.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/icb/icab107

Cites

128 of 128 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Computer vision recently emerged as a powerful alternative for automatic individual identification.

    “Similar to counting and reconstruction (see next section), computer vision recently emerged as a powerful alternative for automatic individual identification54,98–100.”

    From Perspectives in machine learning for wildlife conservation (2022) · cites this paper as [98]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Hendrik W, Chuck S, Jason P, Jason H, Kiirsten F, John C, Barry Paul D, Bedetti A, Henley M, Pope F, et al 2020. Extracting identifying contours for african elephants and humpback whales using a learned appearance model. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. p. 1276– 85.
  2. Jain AK, Flynn P, A Ross A. 2007. Handbook of biometrics. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media.
  3. Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Hinton GE. 2012. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Advances in neural information processing systems. p. 1097– 105.
  4. Murphy KP. 2021. Probabilistic machine learning: an introduction. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
  5. Royle JA, Chandler RB, Sollmann R, Gardner B. 2013. Spatial capture-recapture. Cambridge (MA): Academic Press.
  6. Swaisgood RR, Lindburg DG, White AM, Hemin Z, Xiaoping Z. 2004. Chemical communication in giant pandas. In: Lindburg D, Baragona K, editors. Giant pandas: Biology and Conservation. Berkeley (CA): University of California Press. p. 106–20.
  7. Turk MA, Pentland AP. 1991. Face recognition using eigenfaces. Proceedings. 1991 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. p. 586– 7.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vidal, M., Wolf, N., Rosenberg, B., Harris, B. P., & Mathis, A.
Affiliations
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
  • Alaska Pacific University (US)
Corresponding author
Mathis, Alexander
Venue
Integrative and Comparative Biology
Published
2021-05-29
Volume
61
Issue
3
Pages
900-916
ISSN
  • 1540-7063 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7023
OpenAlex
W3135744304
Cited by
104
References
128
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
FWCI
0.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Integrative and Comparative Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
At-Sea Processors Association and the Groundfish Forum
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Video Surveillance and Tracking Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
Keywords
individual animal identification, computer vision, automatic identification, animal tracking, mark-recapture, image recognition, wildlife monitoring
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Identification Systems, Biology, Computers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review