Upload
dora-montgomery
View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Fish detection based on spectral Fish detection based on spectral differences in the echogram's range and differences in the echogram's range and
temporal domaintemporal domainHelge Balk and Torfinn Lindem
University of OsloDepartment of Physics
[email protected] / [email protected]
Proceeding for the FAST meeting in Bergen June 2003
2
Think of a fish-track in an Think of a fish-track in an echogram and echogram and
- imagine the echo signal along a horizontal line
- imagine the echo signal along a vertical line
3
MaterialMaterial
Simrad EY500 120kHz 4x10 deg Split beam transducer Sonar5-Pro post processing tool
Simrad EY500 Sonar5-Pro
4
Split beam echo sounderSplit beam echo sounder
Phase detector
AmplitudeDetector
4-ChTVG
Single echo detector
Position diagram
SED-Echogram
Amp-Echogram
5
Results
Fish detection
Conclude
Single echo detector
Principle
Welcome
Introduction
Think of a fish Material and method
Importance
Cross-filter detector (CFD)
Problems
Human perception
6
Single echo detection (SED) is Single echo detection (SED) is important in three situationsimportant in three situations a) for fish counting a) for fish counting b) for fish behaviour study b) for fish behaviour study when fish echoes can be resolved as single targetswhen fish echoes can be resolved as single targets
7
c) in abundance estimation of c) in abundance estimation of schools schools where the detections serve as awhere the detections serve as a link between link between the fish and the Echo Integral (EI)the fish and the Echo Integral (EI)
A link can be established by: SED Tracked SED Catch statistics
8
Linking EI and SED to Linking EI and SED to obtain the fish densityobtain the fish density
SED detections surrounding a school gives the size distribution
TS
n
Size distribution (nj)School
SED
sed
tot
sedj
totj
EIEI
,
,
jv
jbsjsedj sN
n
,
,,
SED
=fish density
j =Size class
n =number in size class j
N =all SED
9
The parametric single echo The parametric single echo detector (SED)detector (SED)
Analyse one ping at a time Describe a single echo with parameters
Echo length Shape Phase deviation Angular position Threshold
10
Two problems with SEDTwo problems with SED
1. Rejection of echoes from single fish
2. Detection of false echoes from fluctuations in the background reverberation level
Especially profound with low signal to noise ratio.
11
Results
Fish detection
Conclude
Single echo detectors
Principle
Welcome
Introduction
Think of a fish Material and method
Importance
Cross-filter detector (CFD)
Problems
Differ from SEDHuman
perception How to copy
12
Human perceptionHuman perception
extremely noisy, but we can still see the tracks
Horizontal, stationary recording of spawning Bream
13
Human perception Human perception
This is what the parametric SED evaluatesThis is what a parametric SED seesThis is what we can see
a) We look at more than one ping at a time.
b) We apply information from the background
14
Next question- Next question-
How can we copy these two How can we copy these two elements in a computer elements in a computer algorithm?algorithm?
Answer: They can be copied with filters
15
Results
Fish detection
Conclude
Single echo detector
Principle
Welcome
Introduction
Think of a fish Material and method
Importance
Cross-filter detector (CFD)
filtering in time
Problems
Problems
Differ from SEDHuman
perception
Echogram freq. spectre
filtering in range
combining
How to copy
16
Factors influencing on the Factors influencing on the echogram’s frequency componentsechogram’s frequency components
(mainly controllable factors)
ship velocity
ping ratesample rate
beam widthsound speed
Range
band width
pulse length
Time
17
An example An example from lake from lake d’Annecy (Fr)d’Annecy (Fr)
18
Filtering in timeFiltering in time
1 Remove temporal noise pulses
2 Remove fluctuations in the fish track
Combine information from multiple pings (mean filter)
Missing echoes
threshold
Noise pulseFish echo
threshold
Magnitude
Freq.
Frequency specter
Energy from fish
Energy from noise
19
Filtering in time improves the Filtering in time improves the fish trackfish track
20
Filtering in time, Filtering in time, equation and filter impulse response arrayequation and filter impulse response array
3
3
1
021211 ),1(),(),(
t r
tmrmHtrFmmQ
F Q1
H= [1/3 1/3 1/3]
21
Filtering in rangeFiltering in range
A low-pass filter can remove the fish and detect the background signal
Magnitude
Freq.
Frequency specter
Energy from fish
Energy from background
22
Filtering in range Filtering in range removes the fishremoves the fish
1
0
21
2121212 ),1(),(),(
t r
tmrmHtrFmmQ
.21
121
121
1
H
Echogram F Range filtered echogram Q2
23
Combining the two results by letting Combining the two results by letting Q2 define the threshold in Q1Q2 define the threshold in Q1
0),( 6dB ),(),(
),(),( 6dB ),(),(
321
321
jiQjiQjiQ
jiFjiQjiQjiQ
Echograms
F= Original
Q1= Time filtered
Q2= Range filtered
Q3 =Result
24
Combining the two filtered echogramsCombining the two filtered echograms
Filtering in time
H1Filtering in range
H2Cross filter
Named due to the orientation of the two filter impulse response arrays H1 and H2
Combiningdetector
25
Problems with false detections Problems with false detections
noise fish bottom/schools
Fortunately the size of the detected regions differ
size < size < size
Size filter
26
Problems with echo qualityProblems with echo quality
threshold
time filtered
Faint echoes in a track can be detected in the
process.
Range will be correct
Estimates based on phase such as TS and velocity
may be unreliable
Faint echoes
time signal from a fish
original
threshold
27
Solution to the Solution to the quality problemquality problem
Mark each echo with a quality stamp
A parametric “SED” can do this
all
TS and position
Quality estimation
Cross-filter detected echoes
Tracking
high quality
Combines the best from the two detectors
low qualityhigh quality
28
Implementation of the Cross-Implementation of the Cross-filter detector in Sonar5-Pro filter detector in Sonar5-Pro
softwaresoftware
Amplitudedetector
Phasedetector
TimeFilter
RangeFilter
Combinesignal
backgroundlevel
Sizefilter
Qualityestimation
Detections
low qualityhigh quality
29
Results
Fish detection
Conclude
Single echo detector
Principle
Welcome
Introduction
Think of a fish Material and method
Importance
Cross-filter detector (CFD)
filtering in time
Problems
Problems
Differ from SEDHuman
perception
Echogram Freq. spectre
filtering in range
combining
How to copy
Herring school Spawning
Bream
Migrating Salmon
30
Visual results, spawning BreamVisual results, spawning Bream
Amplitude echogram Parametric single echo detectionCross-filter detection before size filterCross-filter detection after size filter
31
Visual results, herring schoolVisual results, herring school
Rotate
Time filter
Range filter
Combine
Rotate + Size filter
32
Comparing thresholding, parametric Comparing thresholding, parametric SED and Cross-filteringSED and Cross-filtering
Original Amp-echogram Thresholded Amp-echogramParametric SED echogram Cross-filtered SED-echogram
33
Numerical resultsNumerical results
D2
D3
D4 D5
D6
F1
F2
F3
Bottomlines
dB
D1
D=Debris
F=Fish
B=Bottom
Horizontal stationary recording River Tana summer 1999
Amp-
echogram
CFD-echogramSED-echogram
34
NumericalNumericalresultsresults Targets SED
TQ (%)CFD
TQ (%)Fish 1 54 100Fish 2 41 100Fish 3 49 65Debris 1 7 -Debris 2 5 74Debris 3 19 55Debris 4 43 100Debris 5 11 100Debris 6 - 54Bottom 1 33.01m 27 -Bottom 2 34.65m - 100Bottom 3 35.65m - 97Bottom 4 39.52m 41 100Bottom 5 40.06m 25 100Bottom 6 40.87m 37 100Bottom 7 41.37m 51 100Sum in tracks 410 1245Tot. no. of det.TNR 50 % 97%
TQRatio between actual
and possible number of detections
TNRTrack to noise ratio,
number of detections in tracks rel total number
of detections
35
Results
Fish detection
Conclude
Single echo detector
Principle
Welcome
Introduction
Think of a fish Material and method
Importance
Cross-filter detector (CFD)
filtering in time
Problems
Problems
Differ from SEDHuman
perception
Echogram Freq. spectre
filtering in range
combining
How to copy
Herring school Spawning
Bream
Migrating Salmon
Acknowledgement
Conclusion
36
ConclusionsConclusions
The Cross-filter detector is a good alternative to the common parametric single echo detector
The Cross-filter detector is superior in situations with low SNR
37
AcknowledgmentAcknowledgmentData has been provided by…..
Marie Prchalova (Cz)Horizontal recording of spawning Bream
Nathalie Gaudreau (Ca)Vertical recording from
Lake d’Annecy
We thank all for their contribution!
Frank R Knudsen at Simrad
Assisted in the horizontal recording of salmon in River Tana
JimVertical recording of Herring schools outside Vancouver
island
38
Fish detection based on spectral Fish detection based on spectral differences in the echogram's range differences in the echogram's range
and temporal domainand temporal domain
Test CD available by writing to...
[email protected] Balk,
Department of Physics PB1048,
University of Oslo0316 OSLO,
NORWAY
Thank you for your attention!