↓ Skip to main content

Spot the match – wildlife photo-identification using information theory

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
145 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
400 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Spot the match – wildlife photo-identification using information theory
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, January 2007
DOI 10.1186/1742-9994-4-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Conrad W Speed, Mark G Meekan, Corey JA Bradshaw

Abstract

Effective approaches for the management and conservation of wildlife populations require a sound knowledge of population demographics, and this is often only possible through mark-recapture studies. We applied an automated spot-recognition program (I3S) for matching natural markings of wildlife that is based on a novel information-theoretic approach to incorporate matching uncertainty. Using a photo-identification database of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) as an example case, the information criterion (IC) algorithm we developed resulted in a parsimonious ranking of potential matches of individuals in an image library. Automated matches were compared to manual-matching results to test the performance of the software and algorithm.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 400 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
Brazil 4 1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Hungary 3 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Mozambique 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Ecuador 2 <1%
Bahamas 1 <1%
Other 11 3%
Unknown 366 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 84 21%
Researcher 69 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 15%
Student > Bachelor 49 12%
Other 22 6%
Other 60 15%
Unknown 55 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 207 52%
Environmental Science 68 17%
Computer Science 14 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 11 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 2%
Other 25 6%
Unknown 69 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 March 2017.
All research outputs
#3,042,779
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#193
of 650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,445
of 159,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 650 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 159,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.