An Automated Framework for Plant Detection Based on Deep Simulated Learning from Drone Imagery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional mapping and monitoring of agricultural fields are expensive, laborious, and may contain human errors. Technological advances in platforms and sensors, followed by artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning (DL) breakthroughs in intelligent data processing, led to improving the remote sensing applications for precision agriculture (PA). Therefore, technological advances in platforms and sensors and intelligent data processing methods, such as machine learning and DL, and geospatial and remote sensing technologies, have improved the quality of agricultural land monitoring for PA needs. However, providing ground truth data for model training is a time-consuming and tedious task and may contain multiple human errors. This paper proposes an automated and fully unsupervised framework based on image processing and DL methods for plant detection in agricultural lands from very high-resolution drone remote sensing imagery. The proposed framework’s main idea is to automatically generate an unlimited amount of simulated training data from the input image. This capability is advantageous for DL methods and can solve their biggest drawback, i.e., requiring a considerable amount of training data. This framework’s core is based on the faster regional convolutional neural network (R-CNN) with the backbone of ResNet-101 for object detection. The proposed framework’s efficiency was evaluated by two different image sets from two cornfields, acquired by an RGB camera mounted on a drone. The results show that the proposed method leads to an average counting accuracy of 90.9%. Furthermore, based on the average Hausdorff distance (AHD), an average object detection localization error of 11 pixels was obtained. Additionally, by evaluating the object detection metrics, the resulting mean precision, recall, and F1 for plant detection were 0.868, 0.849, and 0.855, respectively, which seem to be promising for an unsupervised plant detection method.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".