Skip to main content

Table 3 Performance measures on eel and salmon positioning for the different filtering techniques

From: Acoustic positioning in a reflective environment: going beyond point-by-point algorithms

 

VPS-NF

HPE

Good p.

Bad p.

YAPS

Eel

% positions kept

100

47

21

52

198

% positions on land

13

7

10

11

5

N positions on land

11,496

2763

1886

4891

8860

95%-quantile V

1.1

0.5

0.6

1

0.4

99%-quantile V

3.3

0.7

1.4

3.4

0.6

Max V

17.7

5

13.9

17.7

8.9

% V > sustained

9.5

1.4

3.5

8.2

0.8

% V > burst

1

0

0.3

1

0

 

Salmon

% positions kept

100

57

33

59

417

% positions on land

5

2

6

5

2

N positions on land

1376

262

502

769

2302

95%-quantile V (m/s)

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.6

0.3

99%-quantile V (m/s)

3.1

0.6

0.6

2.9

0.4

Max V (m/s)

15.7

3

10

15

2.9

% V >  sustained

6.8

1.3

1.3

5.7

0.4

% V >  burst

0.8

0

0.1

0.7

0

  1. (VPS-NF, no filtering; HPE, 75%-quantile HPE as threshold; good p., only positions from good performing receiver clusters; bad p., removing positions from bad performing clusters) and for YAPS positioning