Cargando…

An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection

Drones are being increasingly used in conservation to tackle the illegal poaching of animals. An important aspect of using drones for this purpose is establishing the technological and the environmental factors that increase the chances of success when detecting poachers. Recent studies focused on i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Doull, Katie E., Chalmers, Carl, Fergus, Paul, Longmore, Steve, Piel, Alex K., Wich, Serge A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8232034/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34199208
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21124074
_version_ 1783713552193814528
author Doull, Katie E.
Chalmers, Carl
Fergus, Paul
Longmore, Steve
Piel, Alex K.
Wich, Serge A.
author_facet Doull, Katie E.
Chalmers, Carl
Fergus, Paul
Longmore, Steve
Piel, Alex K.
Wich, Serge A.
author_sort Doull, Katie E.
collection PubMed
description Drones are being increasingly used in conservation to tackle the illegal poaching of animals. An important aspect of using drones for this purpose is establishing the technological and the environmental factors that increase the chances of success when detecting poachers. Recent studies focused on investigating these factors, and this research builds upon this as well as exploring the efficacy of machine-learning for automated detection. In an experimental setting with voluntary test subjects, various factors were tested for their effect on detection probability: camera type (visible spectrum, RGB, and thermal infrared, TIR), time of day, camera angle, canopy density, and walking/stationary test subjects. The drone footage was analysed both manually by volunteers and through automated detection software. A generalised linear model with a logit link function was used to statistically analyse the data for both types of analysis. The findings concluded that using a TIR camera improved detection probability, particularly at dawn and with a 90° camera angle. An oblique angle was more effective during RGB flights, and walking/stationary test subjects did not influence detection with both cameras. Probability of detection decreased with increasing vegetation cover. Machine-learning software had a successful detection probability of 0.558, however, it produced nearly five times more false positives than manual analysis. Manual analysis, however, produced 2.5 times more false negatives than automated detection. Despite manual analysis producing more true positive detections than automated detection in this study, the automated software gives promising, successful results, and the advantages of automated methods over manual analysis make it a promising tool with the potential to be successfully incorporated into anti-poaching strategies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8232034
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82320342021-06-26 An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection Doull, Katie E. Chalmers, Carl Fergus, Paul Longmore, Steve Piel, Alex K. Wich, Serge A. Sensors (Basel) Article Drones are being increasingly used in conservation to tackle the illegal poaching of animals. An important aspect of using drones for this purpose is establishing the technological and the environmental factors that increase the chances of success when detecting poachers. Recent studies focused on investigating these factors, and this research builds upon this as well as exploring the efficacy of machine-learning for automated detection. In an experimental setting with voluntary test subjects, various factors were tested for their effect on detection probability: camera type (visible spectrum, RGB, and thermal infrared, TIR), time of day, camera angle, canopy density, and walking/stationary test subjects. The drone footage was analysed both manually by volunteers and through automated detection software. A generalised linear model with a logit link function was used to statistically analyse the data for both types of analysis. The findings concluded that using a TIR camera improved detection probability, particularly at dawn and with a 90° camera angle. An oblique angle was more effective during RGB flights, and walking/stationary test subjects did not influence detection with both cameras. Probability of detection decreased with increasing vegetation cover. Machine-learning software had a successful detection probability of 0.558, however, it produced nearly five times more false positives than manual analysis. Manual analysis, however, produced 2.5 times more false negatives than automated detection. Despite manual analysis producing more true positive detections than automated detection in this study, the automated software gives promising, successful results, and the advantages of automated methods over manual analysis make it a promising tool with the potential to be successfully incorporated into anti-poaching strategies. MDPI 2021-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8232034/ /pubmed/34199208 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21124074 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Doull, Katie E.
Chalmers, Carl
Fergus, Paul
Longmore, Steve
Piel, Alex K.
Wich, Serge A.
An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection
title An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection
title_full An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection
title_fullStr An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection
title_full_unstemmed An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection
title_short An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection
title_sort evaluation of the factors affecting ‘poacher’ detection with drones and the efficacy of machine-learning for detection
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8232034/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34199208
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21124074
work_keys_str_mv AT doullkatiee anevaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT chalmerscarl anevaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT ferguspaul anevaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT longmoresteve anevaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT pielalexk anevaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT wichsergea anevaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT doullkatiee evaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT chalmerscarl evaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT ferguspaul evaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT longmoresteve evaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT pielalexk evaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection
AT wichsergea evaluationofthefactorsaffectingpoacherdetectionwithdronesandtheefficacyofmachinelearningfordetection