CityNet—Deep learning tools for urban ecoacoustic assessment

Cities support unique and valuable ecological communities, but understanding urban wildlife is limited due to the difficulties of assessing biodiversity. Ecoacoustic surveying is a useful way of assessing habitats, where biotic sound measured from audio recordings is used as a proxy for population abundance and/or activity. However, existing algorithms systematically over and underestimate measures of biotic activity in the presence of typical urban non-biotic sounds in recordings. We develop CityNet, a deep learning system using convolutional neural networks (CNNs), to measure audible biotic (CityBioNet) and anthropogenic (CityAnthroNet) acoustic activity in cities. The CNNs were trained on a large dataset of annotated audio recordings collected across Greater London, UK. Using a held-out test dataset, we compare the precision and recall of CityBioNet and CityAnthroNet separately to the best available alternative algorithms: four Acoustic Indices: Acoustic Complexity Index, Acoustic Diversity Index, Bioacoustic Index, and Normalised Difference Soundscape Index, and a state-of-the-art bird call detection CNN (bulbul). We also compare the effect of non-biotic sounds on the predictions of CityBioNet and bulbul. Finally we apply CityNet to describe acoustic patterns of the urban soundscape in two sites along an urbanisation gradient. CityBioNet was the best performing algorithm for measuring biotic activity in terms of precision and recall, followed by bulbul, whereas the Acoustic Indices performed worst. CityAnthroNet outperformed the Normalised Difference Soundscape Index, but by a smaller margin than CityBioNet achieved against the competing algorithms. The CityBioNet predictions were impacted by mechanical sounds, whereas air traffic and wind sounds influenced the bulbul predictions. Across an urbanisation gradient, we show that CityNet produced realistic daily patterns of biotic and anthropogenic acoustic activity from real-world urban audio data. Using CityNet, it is possible to automatically measure biotic and anthropogenic acoustic activity in cities from audio recordings. If embedded within an autonomous sensing system, CityNet could produce environmental data for cites at large-scales and facilitate investigation of the impacts of anthropogenic activities on wildlife. The algorithms, code and pretrained models are made freely available in combination with two expert-annotated urban audio datasets to facilitate automated environmental surveillance in cities.

[1]  Tzu-Hao Lin,et al.  Improving biodiversity assessment via unsupervised separation of biological sounds from long-duration recordings , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[2]  Almo Farina,et al.  A new methodology to infer the singing activity of an avian community: The Acoustic Complexity Index (ACI) , 2011 .

[3]  Nadia Pieretti,et al.  Application of a recently introduced index for acoustic complexity to an avian soundscape with traffic noise. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[5]  Justin Salamon,et al.  A Dataset and Taxonomy for Urban Sound Research , 2014, ACM Multimedia.

[6]  H. Brumm,et al.  Acoustic communication in the urban environment: patterns, mechanisms, and potential consequences of avian song adjustments , 2013 .

[7]  Sandrine Pavoine,et al.  Acoustic indices for biodiversity assessments: Analyses of bias based on simulated bird assemblages and recommendations for field surveys , 2015 .

[8]  Sandrine Pavoine,et al.  Author's Personal Copy Ecological Indicators Monitoring Animal Diversity Using Acoustic Indices: Implementation in a Temperate Woodland , 2022 .

[9]  Ankit Shah,et al.  DCASE2017 Challenge Setup: Tasks, Datasets and Baseline System , 2017, DCASE.

[10]  Sneha A. Dalvi,et al.  Internet of Things for Smart Cities , 2017 .

[11]  E. D. Chesmore,et al.  Automated identification of field-recorded songs of four British grasshoppers using bioacoustic signal recognition , 2004, Bulletin of Entomological Research.

[12]  T. Mitchell Aide,et al.  Soundscape analysis and acoustic monitoring document impacts of natural gas exploration on biodiversity in a tropical forest , 2017 .

[13]  Kate E. Jones,et al.  Acoustic identification of Mexican bats based on taxonomic and ecological constraints on call design , 2016 .

[14]  John D. Hunter,et al.  Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment , 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering.

[15]  Michael Veith,et al.  Biodiversity in cities needs space: a meta-analysis of factors determining intra-urban biodiversity variation. , 2015, Ecology letters.

[16]  Bryan C. Pijanowski,et al.  A primer of acoustic analysis for landscape ecologists , 2011, Landscape Ecology.

[17]  Thomas Grill,et al.  Two convolutional neural networks for bird detection in audio signals , 2017, 2017 25th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO).

[18]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[19]  Kate E. Jones,et al.  Challenges of Using Bioacoustics to Globally Monitor Bats , 2013 .

[20]  Paulo Farinha-Marques,et al.  Urban biodiversity: a review of current concepts and contributions to multidisciplinary approaches , 2011 .

[21]  Roberta E. Martin,et al.  Multi-trophic invasion resistance in Hawaii: bioacoustics, field surveys, and airborne remote sensing. , 2007, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[22]  Nadia Pieretti,et al.  Acoustic Indices for Biodiversity Assessment and Landscape Investigation , 2014 .

[23]  Ulla Mörtberg,et al.  A global analysis of the impacts of urbanization on bird and plant diversity reveals key anthropogenic drivers , 2014, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[24]  Stuart H. Gage,et al.  Connecting soundscape to landscape: Which acoustic index best describes landscape configuration? , 2015 .

[25]  Damon M. Hall,et al.  The city as a refuge for insect pollinators , 2017, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[26]  Andrea Zanella,et al.  Internet of Things for Smart Cities , 2014, IEEE Internet of Things Journal.

[27]  Takashi Inoue,et al.  Indicators for management of urban biodiversity and ecosystem services : city biodiversity index , 2013 .

[28]  Thierry Aubin,et al.  SEEWAVE, A FREE MODULAR TOOL FOR SOUND ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS , 2008 .

[29]  Colin Raffel,et al.  librosa: Audio and Music Signal Analysis in Python , 2015, SciPy.

[30]  Hervé Glotin,et al.  Bird detection in audio: A survey and a challenge , 2016, 2016 IEEE 26th International Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing (MLSP).

[31]  Martial Hebert,et al.  Low-Shot Learning from Imaginary Data , 2018, 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[32]  Patrick Dattalo,et al.  Statistical Power Analysis , 2008 .

[33]  Dan Stowell,et al.  Automatic large-scale classification of bird sounds is strongly improved by unsupervised feature learning , 2014, PeerJ.

[34]  Michael Towsey,et al.  A practical comparison of manual and autonomous methods for acoustic monitoring , 2013 .

[35]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[36]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[37]  Christian Dietz,et al.  A continental-scale tool for acoustic identification of European bats , 2012 .

[38]  John Salvatier,et al.  Theano: A Python framework for fast computation of mathematical expressions , 2016, ArXiv.

[39]  Eric P. Kasten,et al.  The remote environmental assessment laboratory's acoustic library: An archive for studying soundscape ecology , 2012, Ecol. Informatics.

[40]  Lauren Pinault,et al.  Urban greenness and mortality in Canada's largest cities: a national cohort study. , 2017, The Lancet. Planetary health.

[41]  Paul Roe,et al.  The use of acoustic indices to determine avian species richness in audio-recordings of the environment , 2014, Ecol. Informatics.

[42]  Justin Salamon,et al.  Scaper: A library for soundscape synthesis and augmentation , 2017, 2017 IEEE Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics (WASPAA).

[43]  Sergey Ioffe,et al.  Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shift , 2015, ICML.

[44]  Fahrurrozi,et al.  Measuring sound detection spaces for acoustic animal sampling and monitoring , 2016 .

[45]  Susanna Saari,et al.  Urban biodiversity: patterns and mechanisms , 2011, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[46]  T. Mitchell Aide,et al.  Real-time bioacoustics monitoring and automated species identification , 2013, PeerJ.

[47]  Helena Titheridge,et al.  Biases of acoustic indices measuring biodiversity in urban areas , 2017 .

[48]  Honglak Lee,et al.  Unsupervised feature learning for audio classification using convolutional deep belief networks , 2009, NIPS.

[49]  Héctor Corrada Bravo,et al.  Automated classification of bird and amphibian calls using machine learning: A comparison of methods , 2009, Ecol. Informatics.

[50]  Almo Farina,et al.  Ecoacoustics: the Ecological Investigation and Interpretation of Environmental Sound , 2015, Biosemiotics.

[51]  Luis J. Villanueva-Rivera,et al.  Soundscape Ecology: The Science of Sound in the Landscape , 2011 .