Literature DB >> 2926691

A comparison of signal detection between an echolocating dolphin and an optimal receiver.

W W Au1, D A Pawloski.   

Abstract

An electronic simulated target apparatus was used in a two-experiment study to compare the target detection performance of an echolocating bottlenose dolphin with an optimal receiver. Random Gaussian noise with a relatively flat spectrum from 20 to 160 kHz was used as a masking source. Experiment I was conducted to establish a technique for estimating the echo energy-to-noise ratio, Ee/N, at the dolphin's threshold of detection. Dolphins typically vary the amplitude of their emitted signal over a large range making it difficult to estimate Ee/N. In the first part of experiment I, the simulated echo was a double click, the pulses separated by 200 microseconds, with each pulse being a replica of the dolphin's transmitted signal. A staircase psychophysical procedure was used to obtain the detection threshold, and the echo energy-to-noise ratio based on the highest amplitude click emitted per trial, (Ee/N)max, was determined at each reversal point. The second echo type consisted of one of the animal's echolocation clicks, previously measured, digitized and stored in an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM). The electronic target simulator was modified so that every time the dolphin emitted an echolocation signal, the EPROM was triggered to produce two pulses separated by 200 microseconds. On any trial, the EPROM signal was played back at a fixed amplitude, regardless of the amplitude of the dolphin's emitted signal. The Ee/N obtained with the EPROM signal at threshold was found to be 2.9 dB lower than (Ee/N)max obtained with the normal phantom target. Therefore an estimate of Ee/N can be obtained by subtracting 2.9 dB from (Ee/N)max.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2926691     DOI: 10.1007/BF00610439

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Physiol A            Impact factor:   1.836


  7 in total

1.  Detection of underwater signals by a California sea lion and a bottlenose porpoise: variation in the payoff matrix.

Authors:  R J Schusterman; B Barrett; P Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Detection of complex echoes in noise by an echolocating dolphin.

Authors:  W W Au; P W Moore; D A Pawloski
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The detection of phantom targets in noise by serotine bats; negative evidence for the coherent receiver.

Authors:  N Troest; B Møhl
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  Low false-alarm rates in signal detection by marine mammals.

Authors:  R J Schusterman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1974-04       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Target detection by the beluga using a surface-reflected path.

Authors:  R H Penner; C W Turl; W W Au
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Demonstration of adaptation in beluga whale echolocation signals.

Authors:  W W Au; D A Carder; R H Penner; B L Scronce
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Comparison of target detection capabilities of the beluga and bottlenose dolphin.

Authors:  C W Turl; R H Penner; W W Au
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 1.840

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.