Alfalfa detection and stem count from proximal images using a combination of deep neural networks and machine learning
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
• The combination of semantic segmentation and machine learning models can effectively quantify alfalfa stems in an image. • Deep semantic segmentation models can be efficiently trained by combining synthetic and real images. • Synthetic images improve model generalization and significantly reduce the time spent on manual image annotation. • A simple deep U-Net model demonstrated superior performance in classifying alfalfa pixels compared to advanced ones. Among various types of forages, Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) is a crucial forage crop that plays a vital role in livestock nutrition and sustainable agriculture. As a result of its ability to adapt to different weather conditions and its high nitrogen fixation capability, this crop produces high-quality forage that contains between 15 and 22 % protein. It is fortunately possible to improve the overall prediction of forage biomass and quality prior to harvest through remote sensing technologies. The recent advent of deep Convolution Neural Networks (deep CNNs) enables researchers to utilize these incredible algorithms. This study aims to build a model to count the number of alfalfa stems from proximal images. To this end, we first utilized a deep CNN encoder-decoder to segment alfalfa and other background objects in a field, such as soil and grass. Subsequently, we employed the alfalfa cover fractions derived from the proximal images to develop and train machine learning regression models for estimating the stem count in the images. This study uses many proximal images taken from significant number of fields in four provinces of Canada over three consecutive years. A combination of real and synthetic images has been utilized to feed the deep neural network encoder-decoder. This study gathered roughly 3447 alfalfa images, 5332 grass images, and 9241 background images for training the encoder-decoder model. With data augmentation, we prepared about 60,000 annotated images of alfalfa fields containing alfalfa, grass, and background utilizing a pre-trained model in less than an hour. Several convolutional neural network encoder-decoder models have also been utilized in this study. Simple U-Net, Attention U-Net (Att U-Net), and ResU-Net with attention gates have been trained to detect alfalfa and differentiate it from other objects. The best Intersections over Union (IoU) for simple U-Net classes were 0.98, 0.93, and 0.80 for background, alfalfa and grass, respectively. Simple U-Net with synthetic data provides a promising result over unseen real images and requires an RGB iPad image for field-specific alfalfa detection. It was also observed that simple U-Net has slightly better accuracy than attention U-Net and attention ResU-Net. Finally, we built regression models between the alfalfa cover fraction in the original images taken by iPad, and the mean alfalfa stems per square foot. Random forest (RF), Support Vector Regression (SVR), and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) methods have been utilized to estimate the number of stems in the images. RF was the best model for estimating the number of alfalfa stems relative to other machine learning algorithms, with a coefficient of determination (R 2 ) of 0.82, root-mean-square error of 13.00, and mean absolute error of 10.07.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».