Abstract

Public aquariums and similar institutions often use video as a method to monitor the behavior, health, and status of aquatic organisms in their environments. These video footages take up a sizeable amount of space and require the use of autoencoders to reduce their file size for efficient storage. The autoencoder neural network is an emerging technique which uses the extracted latent space from an input source to reduce the image size for storage, and then reconstructs the source within an acceptable loss range for use. To meet an aquarium’s practical needs, the autoencoder must have easily maintainable codes, low power consumption, be easily adoptable, and not require a substantial amount of memory use or processing power. Conventional configurations of autoencoders often provide results that perform beyond an aquarium’s needs at the cost of being too complex for their architecture to handle, while few take low-contrast sources into consideration. Thus, in this instance, “keeping it simple” would be the ideal approach to the autoencoder’s model design. This paper proposes a practical approach catered to an aquarium’s specific needs through the configuration of autoencoder parameters. It first explores the differences between the two of the most widely applied autoencoder approaches, Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) and Convolution Neural Networks (CNN), to identify the most appropriate approach. The paper concludes that while both approaches (with proper configurations and image preprocessing) can reduce the dimensionality and reduce visual noise of the low-contrast images gathered from aquatic video footage, the CNN approach is more suitable for an aquarium’s architecture. As an unexpected finding of the experiments conducted, the paper also discovered that by manipulating the formula for the MLP approach, the autoencoder could generate a denoised differential image that contains sharper and more desirable visual information to an aquarium’s operation. Lastly, the paper has found that proper image preprocessing prior to the application of the autoencoder led to better model convergence and prediction results, as demonstrated both visually and numerically in the experiment. The paper concludes that by combining the denoising effect of MLP, CNN’s ability to manage memory consumption, and proper image preprocessing, the specific practical needs of an aquarium can be adeptly fulfilled.

Highlights

  • A common approach to tracking aquatic subjects in an aquarium is to capture their movements through a video camera [1]

  • In pursuit of this goal, the paper answers several questions regarding the outcome and impact of applying the autoencoder technique: (1) what are the key differences between the Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) and Convolution Neural Networks (CNN) autoencoder in terms of the model architecture and their associated parameters; (2) how do autoencoder model parameters impact the outcome; (3) can autoencoder techniques effectively reduce repository spaces; (4) can those regenerated images from the autoencoder adequately serve aquarium research and management purposes; (5) can autoencoder models enhance the collected low-contrast images; and (6) what are the necessary steps and preparations required for an aquarium to apply the proposed autoencoder framework of this paper

  • The experiments showed that applying the MLP model will result in better standardized difference images, which can replace the source low-contrast images; in addition, through a Sobel treatment for enhancing the object shapes [31] it will be handy to the aquarium operation in observing the aquatic subjects only, disregarding the background noises

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A common approach to tracking aquatic subjects in an aquarium is to capture their movements through a video camera [1]. The goal is to reduce the dimensionality of the growing collection of the aquatic subjects over time, to store these videos effectively and efficiently, and to retain useful and desirable visual information In pursuit of this goal, the paper answers several questions regarding the outcome and impact of applying the autoencoder technique: (1) what are the key differences between the Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) and Convolution Neural Networks (CNN) autoencoder in terms of the model architecture and their associated parameters; (2) how do autoencoder model parameters impact the outcome; (3) can autoencoder techniques effectively reduce repository spaces; (4) can those regenerated images from the autoencoder adequately serve aquarium research and management purposes; (5) can autoencoder models enhance the collected low-contrast images; and (6) what are the necessary steps and preparations required for an aquarium to apply the proposed autoencoder framework of this paper

Related Works
Aquatic Subject Sample Image Dataset
Autoencoder Framework
Environment Setup
Autoencoder Model Design
MLP Autoencoder Models
CNN Autoencoder Models
Latent Space Database
Discussion
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call