<p>This is great.  A soundscape characterization category could be useful.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-18T12:20:58.723Z
2022-07-18T12:20:58.723Z
Melissa 
<p>This is a great question, and like all good questions may not have an easy answer. Some important parameters in addition to those listed by other answers are clearly:</p>
<ul>
<li>Real time processing</li>
<li>Offline processing</li>
<li>Max channels</li>
<li>Max sample rate (covered above)</li>
</ul>
<p>Probably also good to list key species groups it's used for to date (though not trying to put people off using software e.g. developed to detect birds to detect marine mammals).</p>
<p>It may also be good to have some kind of compatibility table, i.e. can output from software A be used with software B?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-18T12:43:12.667Z
2022-10-04T20:44:21.823Z
2022-10-04T20:44:21.823Z
Doug Gillespie
<p>How about a community wiki for this info? It would be owned and managed by this community and hosted on this platform.</p>
<p><a href="https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11740/what-are-community-wiki-posts">https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11740/what-are-community-wiki-posts</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-18T21:36:06.197Z
Great Idea--  We have had a discussion on the bioacoustics.meta.stackexchange.com site about wikis and agreed to temporarily pause on wiki until we shift to a public beta. We highly encourage more users to join discussions on META to help us run the site!!!  (see https://bioacoustics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/54/how-to-decide-when-a-topic-question-should-be-made-into-a-community-wiki)
Shannon
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-18T21:39:37.617Z
Yes Shannon. I agree with the pause on the wiki. I'm still learning the ropes on this platform. I sure would like to avoid GitHub, though.
sm1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-18T23:16:20.370Z
Happy to have you on board, your answer was a great excuse for me to encourage users to participate in our meta site- link always at the top of this site (see what I just did there). ;)
Shannon
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-18T17:56:46.047Z
2022-07-18T17:56:46.047Z
sm1
<p>Some of you may have seen Tessa Rhinehart great list of bioacoustics software <a href="https://github.com/rhine3/bioacoustics-software" rel="noreferrer">https://github.com/rhine3/bioacoustics-software</a></p>
<p>We're in the process of trying to turn this into an easier to use searchable database that will live in a github repo.</p>
<p>We want to establish the different kinds of areas within bioacoustics research that software tools address. There may be no standard pipeline to a bioacoustics research project - but maybe we can agree to a schema that best categorizes what software bioacousticians use. Packages might span multiple categories.</p>
<p>Our current list:</p>
<ul>
<li>Data exploration</li>
<li>Organization and annotation</li>
<li>Sound processing</li>
<li>Acoustic parameter measurement</li>
<li>Localization</li>
<li>Detection</li>
<li>Classification</li>
</ul>
<p>What do others think?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-18T14:05:50.277Z
There could be a better repo than GitHub (Microsoft)? If we want an "easier to use searchable database", then maybe GitHub is not the best. If I find a good one, then I would post it in an answer. I sure would like to see what the community proposes.
sm1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-24T11:20:48.273Z
@sm1 I like Wikidata for this kind of information - essentially, it's a more serious version of "wikipedia lists". But wikidata is not always the easiest to use. On the other hand, Github is not a bad choice, because it's very easy to extract the data out (because of the use of git and markdown), so there's no Microsoft commitment involved.
Dan Stowell
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-25T16:14:23.347Z
@Dan Stowell I recommend avoiding GitHub because it's owned by Microsoft and the megalith seems to use the info in there for it's own benefits. See what they did with the code Copilot tool. They seem to disregard the copyright. And why not the wiki option for this community on stack exchange and which was mentioned in another answer here?
sm1
<methods><software>
Categories of Bioacoustics Software
# Categories of Bioacoustics Software

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-07-18)

Some of you may have seen Tessa Rhinehart great list of bioacoustics software <https://github.com/rhine3/bioacoustics-software>

We're in the process of trying to turn this into an easier to use searchable database that will live in a github repo.

We want to establish the different kinds of areas within bioacoustics research that software tools address. There may be no standard pipeline to a bioacoustics research project - but maybe we can agree to a schema that best categorizes what software bioacousticians use. Packages might span multiple categories.

Our current list:

* Data exploration
* Organization and annotation
* Sound processing
* Acoustic parameter measurement
* Localization
* Detection
* Classification

What do others think?

**Tags:** methods, software

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: There could be a better repo than GitHub (Microsoft)? If we want an "easier to use searchable database", then maybe GitHub is not the best. If I find a good one, then I would post it in an answer. I sure would like to see what the community proposes.  
> **username_2**: @username_1 I like Wikidata for this kind of information - essentially, it's a more serious version of "wikipedia lists". But wikidata is not always the easiest to use. On the other hand, Github is not a bad choice, because it's very easy to extract the data out (because of the use of git and markdown), so there's no Microsoft commitment involved.  
> **username_1**: @username_2 I recommend avoiding GitHub because it's owned by Microsoft and the megalith seems to use the info in there for it's own benefits. See what they did with the code Copilot tool. They seem to disregard the copyright. And why not the wiki option for this community on stack exchange and which was mentioned in another answer here?  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2022-07-18. Score: 9

This is great. A soundscape characterization category could be useful.


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2022-07-18. Score: 8

This is a great question, and like all good questions may not have an easy answer. Some important parameters in addition to those listed by other answers are clearly:

* Real time processing
* Offline processing
* Max channels
* Max sample rate (covered above)

Probably also good to list key species groups it's used for to date (though not trying to put people off using software e.g. developed to detect birds to detect marine mammals).

It may also be good to have some kind of compatibility table, i.e. can output from software A be used with software B?


---

### Answer by username_1 on 2022-07-18. Score: 7

How about a community wiki for this info? It would be owned and managed by this community and hosted on this platform.

<https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11740/what-are-community-wiki-posts>

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: Great Idea--  We have had a discussion on the bioacoustics.meta.stackexchange.com site about wikis and agreed to temporarily pause on wiki until we shift to a public beta. We highly encourage more users to join discussions on META to help us run the site!!!  (see https://bioacoustics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/54/how-to-decide-when-a-topic-question-should-be-made-into-a-community-wiki)  
> **username_1**: Yes username_5. I agree with the pause on the wiki. I'm still learning the ropes on this platform. I sure would like to avoid GitHub, though.  
> **username_5**: Happy to have you on board, your answer was a great excuse for me to encourage users to participate in our meta site- link always at the top of this site (see what I just did there). ;)  

---

