MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153421944 · doi:10.3389/frobt.2021.627067

Towards a Machine Vision-Based Yield Monitor for the Counting and Quality Mapping of Shallots

2021· article· en· W3153421944 on OpenAlexafffund
Amanda A. Boatswain Jacques, Viacheslav I. Adamchuk, Jaesung Park, G. Cloutier, James J. Clark, Connor Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Robotics and AI · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine visionArtificial intelligenceAgricultural engineeringPython (programming language)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In comparison to field crops such as cereals, cotton, hay and grain, specialty crops often require more resources, are usually more sensitive to sudden changes in growth conditions and are known to produce higher value products. Providing quality and quantity assessment of specialty crops during harvesting is crucial for securing higher returns and improving management practices. Technical advancements in computer and machine vision have improved the detection, quality assessment and yield estimation processes for various fruit crops, but similar methods capable of exporting a detailed yield map for vegetable crops have yet to be fully developed. A machine vision-based yield monitor was designed to perform size categorization and continuous counting of shallots in-situ during the harvesting process. Coupled with a software developed in Python, the system is composed of a video logger and a global navigation satellite system. Computer vision analysis is performed within the tractor while an RGB camera collects real-time video data of the crops under natural sunlight conditions. Vegetables are first segmented using Watershed segmentation, detected on the conveyor, and then classified by size. The system detected shallots in a subsample of the dataset with a precision of 76%. The software was also evaluated on its ability to classify the shallots into three size categories. The best performance was achieved in the large class (73%), followed by the small class (59%) and medium class (44%). Based on these results, the occasional occlusion of vegetables and inconsistent lighting conditions were the main factors that hindered performance. Although further enhancements are envisioned for the prototype system, its modular and novel design permits the mapping of a selection of other horticultural crops. Moreover, it has the potential to benefit many producers of small vegetable crops by providing them with useful harvest information in real-time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Robotics and AISame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207