Cited by 40Underwater Acoustics ResearchDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningAdvanced Neural Network Applications

Object Recognition in Forward Looking Sonar Images using Transfer Learning

Open access
Fuchs, Louise Rixon, Gallstrom, Andreas, Folkesson, John·2018·2018 IEEE/OES Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Workshop (AUV)

Abstract

Forward Looking Sonars (FLS) are a typical choice of sonar for autonomous underwater vehicles. They are most often the main sensor for obstacle avoidance and can be used for monitoring, homing, following and docking as well. Those tasks require discrimination between noise and various classes of objects in the sonar images. Robust recognition of sonar data still remains a problem, but if solved it would enable more autonomy for underwater vehicles providing more reliable information about the surroundings to aid decision making. Recent advances in image recognition using Deep Learning methods have been rapid. While image recognition with Deep Learning is known to require large amounts of labeled data, there are data-efficient learning methods using generic features learned by a network pre-trained on data from a different domain. This enables us to work with much smaller domain-specific datasets, making the method interesting to explore for sonar object recognition with limited amounts of training data. We have developed a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) based classifier for FLS-images and compared its performance to classification using classical methods and hand-crafted features.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/auv.2018.8729686

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • A CNN pretrained with ImageNet and fine-tuned with a small sonar dataset achieved a maximum accuracy of 97% for classifying low-resolution forward-looking sonar images.

    “The maximum accuracy achieved in this study was 97%, thus supporting the hypothesis that the feature-extraction process, obtained with pretrained CNN, was effective for classifying low-resolution FLS images.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fuchs, L. R., Gallstrom, A., & Folkesson, J.
Affiliations
KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
Venue
2018 IEEE/OES Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Workshop (AUV)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2018-11
Pages
1-6
OpenAlex
W2951228273
Cited by
40
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3
FWCI
12.70
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • IEEE/OES Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (publishedVersion)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Underwater Acoustics Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
forward-looking sonar, transfer learning, autonomous underwater vehicles, convolutional neural networks, obstacle avoidance, limited training data, sonar image classification

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