Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Vocalization exemplars.

Amplitude and time-frequency spectrograms are shown for representative exemplars of the marmoset call types considered in this study. A: Alarm, B: Chirp, C: Loud shrill, D: Phee-2, E: Phee-3, F: Phee-4, G: Seep, H: Trill, I: Tsik, J: Tsik-Ek, K: Twitter.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

The number of calls considering each class.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 2.

The effect of training set size on classification performance.

For the sake of visual clarity, the results of OPF using the distance metrics Bray-Curtis and Chi-Square, and SVM using linear and polynomial kernels are excluded.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 2.

Classification of all eight classes of vocalizations using different algorithms.

90% of the samples were used for the training set. Time refers to the time required to classify one sample in milliseconds.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Confusion matrix considering the classification of all eight classes of vocalizations using OPF with Manhattan distance and 90% of the samples for training set.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Confusion matrix considering the classification of the principal Phee class into sub-classes using OPF with Euclidean distance metric and 90% of the samples for training set.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Confusion matrix for the classification of the principal Tsik class into sub-classes using OPF with Manhattan distance metric and 90% of the samples for training set.

More »

Table 5 Expand