Large-Scale Whale Call Classification Using Deep Convolutional Neural Network Architectures
Abstract
As the rapid development of deep learning techniques, extensive interest has been taken into the applications of deep learning methods on challenging problems of different domains. In view of the recent success of convolutional neural network (CNN) in various tasks of audio analysis, a comparative performance study of different the-state-of-the-art CNN architectures on a large-scale whale-call classification task is investigated in this paper. On the basis of deep neural network models, distinctive features of whale sub-populations are extracted to obtain higher level abstract representations for the accurate classification, which is significantly superior to the traditional classification approaches using manual features based on expert knowledge. In particular, a large open-source acoustic dataset recorded by audio sensors carried by whales in different locations is employed for performance comparison. Based on the experiments, it is found that the advancement of popular CNN architectures significantly improve the accuracy on the whalecall classification task. The accuracy and computational efficiency varies with the change of the CNN architectures. Xception provides the best performance among all four CNN architectures while an ensemble of CNN models can produce even better results.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The logarithmic encoding of frequencies produced results 10 percentage points higher than linear encoding.
“This work showed that the logarithmic encoding of frequencies produced results 10 percentage points higher than linear encoding”
From A Survey of Underwater Acoustic Data Classification Methods Using Deep Learning for Shoreline Surveillance (2022) · cites this paper as [104]
Cites
ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. (2017) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3065386 · Cited by 112,155 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Domingos, L. C. F., Santos, P. E., Skelton, P. S. M., Brinkworth, R. S. A., & Sammut, K. (2022) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22062181 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
“The classification of large-scale acoustic signals was evaluated in [104], with a comparison among four popular CNN models (VGGnet, Inception, Xception, and DenseNet) and a classical baseline approach.”
BackgroundMethod
- Authors
- Wang, D., Zhang, L., Lu, Z., & Xu, K.
- Affiliations
- National University of Defense Technology (CN)
- Venue
- 2018 IEEE International Conference on Signal Processing, Communications and Computing (ICSPCC)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2018-09
- Pages
- 1-5
- OpenAlex
- W2904801617
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 1.34
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Signal Processing, Communications and Computing (ICSPCC) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Marine animal studies overview
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
- Keywords
- cetacean vocalizations, convolutional neural network architecture, Xception, CNN ensemble, audio classification, computational efficiency
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