MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206630863 · doi:10.3390/rs14020293

Human vs. Machine, the Eyes Have It. Assessment of Stemphylium Leaf Blight on Onion Using Aerial Photographs from an NIR Camera

2022· article· en· W4206630863 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mary Ruth McDonald, Cyril Selasi Tayviah, B. D. Gossen

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgricultural Adaptation CouncilMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexBlightRemote sensingCanopyHorticultureEnvironmental scienceVegetation IndexAerial photographyLeaf area indexBiologyAgronomyBotanyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerial surveillance could be a useful tool for early detection and quantification of plant diseases, however, there are often confounding effects of other types of plant stress. Stemphylium leaf blight (SLB), caused by the fungus Stemphylium vesicarium, is a damaging foliar disease of onion. Studies were conducted to determine if near-infrared photographic images could be used to accurately assess SLB severity in onion research trials in the Holland Marsh in Ontario, Canada. The site was selected for its uniform soil and level topography. Aerial photographs were taken in 2015 and 2016 using an Xnite-Canon SX230NDVI with a near-infrared filter, mounted on a modified Cine Star—8 MK Heavy Lift RTF octocopter UAV. Images were taken at 15–20 m above the ground, providing an average of 0.5 cm/pixel and a field of view of 15 × 20 m. Photography and ground assessments of disease were carried out on the same day. NDVI (normalized difference vegetation index), green NDVI, chlorophyll index and plant senescence reflective index (PSRI) were calculated from the images. There were differences in SLB incidence and severity in the field plots and differences in the vegetative indices among the treatments, but there were no correlations between disease assessments and any of the indices.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1020.047

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207