Presenting an extensive lab- and field-image dataset of crops and weeds for computer vision tasks in agriculture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present two large datasets of labelled plant-images that are suited towards the training of machine learning and computer vision models. The first dataset encompasses as the day of writing over 1.2 million images of indoor-grown crops and weeds common to the Canadian Prairies and many US states. The second dataset consists of over 540,000 images of plants imaged in farmland. All indoor plant images are labelled by species and we provide rich etadata on the level of individual images. This comprehensive database allows to filter the datasets under user-defined specifications such as for example the crop-type or the age of the plant. Furthermore, the indoor dataset contains images of plants taken from a wide variety of angles, including profile shots, top-down shots, and angled perspectives. The images taken from plants in fields are all from a top-down perspective and contain usually multiple plants per image. For these images metadata is also available. In this paper we describe both datasets' characteristics with respect to plant variety, plant age, and number of images. We further introduce an open-access sample of the indoor-dataset that contains 1,000 images of each species covered in our dataset. These, in total 14,000 images, had been selected, such that they form a representative sample with respect to plant age and ndividual plants per species. This sample serves as a quick entry point for new users to the dataset, allowing them to explore the data on a small scale and find the parameters of data most useful for their application without having to deal with hundreds of thousands of individual images.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.018 |
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".