# Baboonland Eval

> baboonland-eval

- Skill: `qhjqhj00/baboonland-eval` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add qhjqhj00/baboonland-eval`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00/baboonland-eval/raw
- Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: qhjqhj00 (https://skillmd.com/u/qhjqhj00)
- Updated: 2026-09-21
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/qhjqhj00/baboonland-eval

---


# baboonland-eval

> BaboonLand Dataset: Tracking Primates in the Wild and Automating Behaviour Recognition from Drone Videos — Duporge et al. (2024) (arXiv:2405.17698, 2024)

## What this evaluates

This benchmark evaluates computer vision models on three core tasks using drone footage of wild baboons: object detection, multi-object tracking, and fine-grained behavioral recognition. It probes a model's ability to handle extreme scale variation, heavy occlusion, and temporal context in natural, uncontrolled wildlife environments.

## Datasets

- **BaboonLand** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)

## Metrics

- `Top-1 accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
  - Percentage of correctly predicted behavioral categories out of total instances. Reported as both micro-average (per instance) and macro-average (per class) across 12 behavioral categories.
- `mAP@50` — range: percent
  - Mean Average Precision at Intersection over Union (IoU) threshold of 0.5. Averages the precision-recall curve for each class.
- `MOTA` — range: percent
  - Multiple Object Tracking Accuracy, measuring tracking correctness by penalizing false positives, false negatives, and identity switches relative to ground truth trajectories.

## Input / output format

**Input**: Drone video frames or short video clips (typically 16 frames sampled at rate 5) containing baboons in natural environments. Detection/tracking tasks utilize tiled multi-scale image pyramids (2x2, 3x3, 4x4) to handle small object sizes.

**Output**: Bounding boxes with class labels for detection/tracking, or discrete behavioral category labels (e.g., 'Sitting/Standing', 'Drinking', 'Foraging') for behavior recognition.

## Scoring recipe

```python
def compute_top1_accuracy(predictions, gold_labels, average='micro'):
    if average == 'micro':
        return sum(p == g for p, g in zip(predictions, gold_labels)) / len(gold_labels)
    else:  # macro
        classes = set(gold_labels)
        class_accs = [sum(p == g for p, g in zip(predictions, gold_labels) if g == c) / sum(1 for g in gold_labels if g == c) for c in classes]
        return sum(class_accs) / len(class_accs)
```

## Common pitfalls

- Rare behavioral categories are significantly harder to recognize than frequent ones, leading to skewed macro-averaged performance.
- Visual similarity between certain actions (e.g., Drinking, Foraging, Mounting) causes models to default to predicting 'Sitting/Standing'.
- Small object scale in raw drone footage requires a tiled multi-scale pyramid approach; evaluating on raw full-resolution frames without tiling yields poor detection.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> To provide the baseline for behavior recognition, we trained I3D*[[60]], SlowFast*[[61]], and X3D*[[62]] models on our dataset. We report micro (per instance) average and macro (per class) average accuracy. The confusion matrix depicted in [Fig. 3] demonstrates the performance of the X3D model. We can see that the model performs quite well for common classes but rare behaviors are more challenging.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{duporge2024baboonland,
  title={BaboonLand Dataset: Tracking Primates in the Wild and Automating Behaviour Recognition from Drone Videos},
  author={Duporge et al. (2024)},
  year={2024},
  note={arXiv:2405.17698}
}
```

- arXiv: 2405.17698