MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977573024 · doi:10.13031/2013.39005

Technical Note: Ripe Tomato Detection for Robotic Vision Harvesting Systems in Greenhouses

2011· article· en· W1977573024 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the ASABE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceRobustness (evolution)Computer visionCluster analysisGreenhouseComputer scienceMachine visionPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsHorticultureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective recognition and localization of ripe tomatoes from a complex background is the key issue for robotic harvesting systems in greenhouses. In this study, a detection approach for ripe tomatoes is proposed based on their color and shape features. Images containing ripe tomatoes are first segmented by K-means clustering using the L*a*b* color space. To recognize a single ripe tomato, mathematical morphology is used to denoise the image and to handle the situations of image overlapping and sheltering. To improve the accuracy of tomato detection, the shape features are combined with the color features. Finally, the center of the detected single ripe tomato is calculated. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method. The successful detection rate is approximately 94%. Even with the overlapping and complex cluster background, the proposed algorithm still shows a very strong robustness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it