Target Detection in Noise by Echolocating Dolphins
It is well known that dolphins possess a sonar capability which allows them to project acoustic energy and analyze returning echoes in order to detect and recognize objects under water. The use of acoustic energy is probably the most effective way to probe an underwater environment for purposes of navigation, obstacle avoidance, prey and predator detection, and object localization and detection. Acoustic and other mechanical vibrational energy propagates in water more efficiently than any form of energy including electromagnetic, thermal and optical energy. Since the natural habitats of many dolphin species include shallow bays, inlets, coastal waters, swamps, marshlands, and rivers that are often so murky or turbid that vision is severely limited, these animals must rely heavily on their active and passive sonar capabilities for survival. Some of the sonar capabilities of dolphins have been described in review articles by Nachtigall (1980) and Au (1988).
KeywordsTarget Detection Ambient Noise Target Strength Optimal Receiver Ideal Receiver
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Albers, V. M., 1965, “Underwater Acoustic Handbook II”, The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park.Google Scholar
- Elliott, P. B., 1964, Appendix 1-Tables of d’, in: “Signal Detection and Recognition by Human Observers,” J. Swet, ed., John Wiley, New York, pp. 651–684.Google Scholar
- Green, D. M., and Swets, J. A., 1966, “Signal Detection and Psycho-physics,” Krieger, Huntington, N. Y.,Google Scholar
- Petersen, W. W., Birdsall, T. G., and Fox, W. C., 1954, The Theory of Signal Detectability, Trans IRE. PGIT. 4: 171–212.Google Scholar
- Urick, R. J., 1984, “Ambient Noise in the Sea”, U. S. Printing Office, Washington D. C.Google Scholar
- Urkowitz, H., 1967, Energy Detection of Unknown Deterministic Signals, Proc. I.E.E.E., 55: 523–531.Google Scholar
- Vel’min, V. A., and Dubrosvkiy, N. A., 1976, The Critical Interval of Active Hearing in Dolphins, Sov. Phys. Acoust., 2: 351–352.Google Scholar