Proceedings

Interactive Machine Learning Solutions for Acoustic Monitoring of Animal Wildlife in Biosphere Reserves

Download BibTeX Cite

Proceedings of the Thirty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AI for Good - Projects. Pages 6405-6413.

https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2023/711

Abstract

Biodiversity loss is taking place at accelerated rates globally, and a business-as-usual trajectory will lead to missing internationally established conservation goals. Biosphere reserves are sites designed to be of global significance in terms of both the biodiversity within them and their potential for sustainable development, and are therefore ideal places for the development of local solutions to global challenges. While the protection of biodiversity is a primary goal of biosphere reserves, adequate information on the state and trends of biodiversity remains a critical gap for adaptive management in biosphere reserves. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) is an increasingly popular method for continued, reproducible, scalable, and cost-effective monitoring of animal wildlife. PAM adoption is on the rise, but its data management and analysis requirements pose a barrier for adoption for most agencies tasked with monitoring biodiversity. As an interdisciplinary team of machine learning scientists and ecologists experienced with PAM and working at biosphere reserves in marine and terrestrial ecosystems on three different continents, we report on the co-development of interactive machine learning tools for semi-automated assessment of animal wildlife.

  1. [Amershi et al., 2014] Saleema Amershi, Maya Cakmak, William Bradley Knox, and Todd Kulesza. Power to the People: The Role of Humans in Interactive Machine Learning. AI Magazine, 35(4):105-120, December 2014. Number: 4.
  2. [Bengio et al., 2013] Yoshua Bengio, Aaron Courville, and Pascal Vincent. Representation Learning: A Review and New Perspectives. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Anal- ysis and Machine Intelligence, 35(8):1798-1828, August 2013. Conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. [
  3. [Biehl et al., 2016] Michael Biehl, Barbara Ham- mer, and Thomas Villmann. Prototype-based models in machine learning. WIREs Cog- nitive Science, 7(2):92-111, 2016. eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/wcs.1378. DOI
  4. [Brendel and Bethge, 2019] Wieland Brendel and Matthias Bethge. Approximating cnns with bag-of-local- features models works surprisingly well on imagenet. arXiv:1904.00760, 2019.
  5. [CBD, 2022] CBD. Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, December 2022.
  6. [Chen et al., 2019] Chaofan Chen, Oscar Li, Daniel Tao, Alina Barnett, Cynthia Rudin, and Jonathan K Su. This Looks Like That: Deep Learning for Interpretable Image Recognition. In Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems, volume 32.
  7. Curran Associates, Inc., 2019.
  8. [Gillespie et al., 2009] Douglas Gillespie, David K. Mellinger, Jonathan Gordon, David McLaren, Paul Redmond, Ronald McHugh, Philip Trinder, Xiao-Yan Deng, and Aaron Thode. PAMGUARD: Semiautomated, open source software for real-time acoustic detection and localization of cetaceans. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125(4):2547-2547, April 2009.
  9. [Gouvêa et al., 2022a] Thiago S Gouvêa, Ilira Troshani, Marc Herrlich, and Daniel Sonntag. Annotating Sound Events Through Interactive Design of Interpretable Fea- tures. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Hybrid Human-Machine Intelligence, pages 305-306, 2022.
  10. [Gouvêa et al., 2022b] Thiago S Gouvêa, Ilira Troshani, Marc Herrlich, and Daniel Sonntag. Interactive design of interpretable features for marine soundscape data annota- tion. In Human-Centered Design of Symbiotic Hybrid In- telligence, HHAI, Amsterdam, June 2022.
  11. [Gunderson, 2008] L. Gunderson. Adaptive Management and Integrative Assessments. Encyclopedia of Ecology, pages 55-59, January 2008.
  12. [Hartmann et al., 2022] Mareike Hartmann, Han Du, Nils Feldhus, Ivana Kruijff-Korbayová, and Daniel Sonntag. XAINES: explaining AI with narratives. Künstliche In- tell., 36(3):287-296, 2022.
  13. [Heinicke et al., 2015] Stefanie Heinicke, Ammie K. Kalan, Oliver J.J. Wagner, Roger Mundry, Hanna Lukashevich, and Hjalmar S. Kühl. Assessing the performance of a semi-automated acoustic monitoring system for primates. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 6(7):753-763, 2015.
  14. [IPBES, 2019] IPBES. Global Assessment Report on Biodi- versity and Ecosystem Services, May 2019.
  15. [Jetz et al., 2019] Walter Jetz, Melodie A. McGeoch, Robert Guralnick, Simon Ferrier, Jan Beck, Mark J. Costello, Miguel Fernandez, Gary N. Geller, Petr Keil, Cory Merow, Carsten Meyer, Frank E. Muller-Karger, Henrique M. Pereira, Eugenie C. Regan, Dirk S. Schmeller, and Eren Turak. Essential biodiversity variables for mapping and monitoring species populations. Nat Ecol Evol, 3(4):539- 551, April 2019. 162 citations (Crossref) [2022-10-26] Number: 4 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  16. [Kahl et al., 2021] Stefan Kahl, Connor M Wood, Maximil- ian Eibl, and Holger Klinck. Birdnet: A deep learning solution for avian diversity monitoring. Ecological Infor- matics, 61:101236, 2021.
  17. [Kath et al., 2023a] Hannes Kath, Thiago S Gouvêa, and Daniel Sonntag. A deep generative model for interac- tive data annotation through direct manipulation in latent space. arXiv:2305.15337, 2023.
  18. [Kath et al., 2023b] Hannes Kath, Thiago S. Gouvêa, and Daniel Sonntag. A human-in-the-loop tool for annotat- ing passive acoustic monitoring datasets. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Joint Conference on Artificial In- telligence, IJCAI, 2023. IJCAI
  19. [Kath et al., 2023c] Hannes Kath, Bengt Lüers, Thiago S Gouvêa, and Daniel Sonntag. A virtual reality tool for rep- resenting, visualizing and updating deep learning models. arXiv:2305.15353, 2023.
  20. [Kingma and Welling, 2013] Diederik P Kingma and Max Welling. Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv:1312.6114, 2013.
  21. [Kingma et al., 2014] Durk P Kingma, Shakir Mohamed, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, and Max Welling. Semi- supervised Learning with Deep Generative Models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol- ume 27.
  22. Curran Associates, Inc., 2014.
  23. [Parasuraman et al., 2000] R. Parasuraman, T.B. Sheridan, and C.D. Wickens. A model for types and levels of hu- man interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics -Part A: Systems and Humans, 30(3):286-297, May 2000. Conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.
  24. [Pereira et al., 2013] Henrique Miguel Pereira, Simon Fer- rier, Michele Walters, Gary N Geller, Rob HG Jongman, Robert J Scholes, Michael William Bruford, Neil Brum- mitt, Stuart HM Butchart, AC Cardoso, et al. Essential biodiversity variables. Science, 339(6117):277-278, 2013.
  25. Andrew J Plumptre. Monitoring mammal populations with line transect techniques in african forests. Journal of Applied Ecology, 37(2):356-368, 2000.
  26. [Prange and Sonntag, 2021] Alexander Prange and Daniel Sonntag. A demonstrator for interactive image clustering and fine-tuning neural networks in virtual reality. In KI 2021: Advances in Artificial Intelligence: 44th German Conference on AI, Virtual Event, September 27-October 1, 2021, Proceedings 44, pages 194-203. Springer, 2021.
  27. [Ratner et al., 2016] Alexander J Ratner, Christopher M De Sa, Sen Wu, Daniel Selsam, and Christopher Ré. Data Programming: Creating Large Training Sets, Quickly. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol- ume 29. NeurIPS, 2016.
  28. [Rudin, 2019] Cynthia Rudin. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat Mach Intell, 1(5):206- 215, May 2019. Number: 5 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  29. [Siddharth et al., 2017] N. Siddharth, Brooks Paige, Jan- Willem van de Meent, Alban Desmaison, Noah D. Good- man, Pushmeet Kohli, Frank Wood, and Philip H. S. Torr. Learning Disentangled Representations with Semi- Supervised Deep Generative Models, November 2017. arXiv:1706.00400 [cs, stat].
  30. [Simard et al., 2017] Patrice Y Simard, Saleema Amershi, David M Chickering, Alicia Edelman Pelton, Soroush Ghorashi, Christopher Meek, Gonzalo Ramos, Jina Suh, Johan Verwey, Mo Wang, et al. Machine teaching: A new paradigm for building machine learning systems. arXiv:1707.06742, 2017.
  31. [Solsona-Berga et al., 2020] Alba Solsona-Berga, Kaitlin E. Frasier, Simone Baumann-Pickering, Sean M. Wiggins, and John A. Hildebrand. Detedit: A graphical user in- terface for annotating and editing events detected in long- term acoustic monitoring data. PLoS Comput. Biol., 16(1), 2020.
  32. [Stowell, 2022] Dan Stowell. Computational bioacoustics with deep learning: a review and roadmap. PeerJ, 10:e13152, 2022.
  33. [Sugai et al., 2019] Larissa Sayuri Moreira Sugai, Thiago Sanna Freire Silva, José Wagner Ribeiro, and Diego Llu- sia. Terrestrial Passive Acoustic Monitoring: Review and Perspectives. BioScience, 69(1):15-25, January 2019.
  34. [Tusfiqur et al., 2022] Hasan Md Tusfiqur, Duy M. H. Nguyen, Mai T. N. Truong, Triet A. Nguyen, Binh T. Nguyen, Michael Barz, Hans-Juergen Profitlich, Ngoc T. T. Than, Ngan Le, Pengtao Xie, and Daniel Sonntag. Drg-net: Interactive joint learning of multi-lesion segmen- tation and classification for diabetic retinopathy grading, 2022.
  35. [Ulloa et al., 2021] Juan Sebastián Ulloa, Sylvain Haupert, Juan Felipe Latorre, Thierry Aubin, and Jérôme Sueur. scikit-maad: An open-source and modular toolbox for quantitative soundscape analysis in Python. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 12(12):2334-2340, 2021.
  36. [UNESCO, 2019] UNESCO. World Network of Biosphere Reserves, October 2019.
  37. [Van Zoelen et al., 2023] Emma Van Zoelen, Tina Mioch, Mani Tajaddini, Christian Fleiner, Stefani Tsaneva, Pietro Camin, Thiago S. Gouvêa, Kim Baraka, Maaike H. T. de Boer, and Mark A. Neerincx. Developing team design patterns for hybrid intelligence systems. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Hybrid Human- Machine Intelligence, HHAI, 2023.
  38. [Watson et al., 2014] James E. M. Watson, Nigel Dudley, Daniel B. Segan, and Marc Hockings. The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature, 515(7525):67- 73, November 2014. Number: 7525 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  39. [Wilkinson et al., 2016] Mark D Wilkinson, Michel Dumon- tier, IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg, Gabrielle Appleton, Myles Axton, Arie Baak, Niklas Blomberg, Jan-Willem Boiten, Luiz Bonino da Silva Santos, Philip E Bourne, et al. The fair guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific data, 3(1):1-9, 2016.
  40. [Woodall et al., 2021] Lucy C. Woodall, Sheena Talma, Oliver Steeds, Paris Stefanoudis, Marie-May Jeremie- Muzungaile, and Alain de Comarmond. Co-development, co-production and co-dissemination of scientific research: a case study to demonstrate mutual benefits. Biol. Lett., 17(4):rsbl.2020.0699, 20200699, April 2021.
  41. [Zacharias et al., 2018] Jan Zacharias, Michael Barz, and Daniel Sonntag. A survey on deep learning toolkits and libraries for intelligent user interfaces. arXiv:1803.04818, 2018.

References were extracted automatically from the PDF and may contain errors.

Welcome Future Conferences AI Journal Division IJCAI Proceedings About IJCAI IJCAI Awards