Comparison between Three Registration Methods in the Case of Non-Georeferenced Close Range of Multispectral Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cucumber powdery mildew, which is caused by Podosphaera xanthii, is a major disease that has a significant economic impact in cucumber greenhouse production. It is necessary to develop a non-invasive fast detection system for that disease. Such a system will use multispectral imagery acquired at a close range with a camera attached to a mobile cart’s mechanic extension. This study evaluated three image registration methods applied to non-georeferenced multispectral images acquired at close range over greenhouse cucumber plants with a MicaSense® RedEdge camera. The detection of matching points was performed using Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF), and outliers matching points were removed using the M-estimator Sample Consensus (MSAC) algorithm. Three geometric transformations (affine, similarity, and projective) were considered in the registration process. For each transformation, we mapped the matching points of the blue, green, red, and NIR band images into the red-edge band space and computed the root mean square error (RMSE in pixel) to estimate the accuracy of each image registration. Our results achieved an RMSE of less than 1 pixel with the similarity and affine transformations and of less than 2 pixels with the projective transformation, whatever the band image. We determined that the best image registration method corresponded to the affine transformation because the RMSE is less than 1 pixel and the RMSEs have a Gaussian distribution for all of the bands, but the blue band.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".