MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293770138 · doi:10.3390/plants11172230

Deep Learning Utilization in Agriculture: Detection of Rice Plant Diseases Using an Improved CNN Model

2022· article· en· W4293770138 on OpenAlexaff
Ghazanfar Latif, Sherif E. Abdelhamid, Roxane Elias Mallouhy, Jaafar Alghazo, Zafar Abbas Kazimi

Bibliographic record

VenuePlants · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersCommonwealth Cyber Initiative
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkRice plantTransfer of learningArtificial intelligenceDeep learningComputer scienceMachine learningTask (project management)PopulationLeaf spotAgricultureAgricultural engineeringAgronomyBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rice is considered one the most important plants globally because it is a source of food for over half the world's population. Like other plants, rice is susceptible to diseases that may affect the quantity and quality of produce. It sometimes results in anywhere between 20-40% crop loss production. Early detection of these diseases can positively affect the harvest, and thus farmers would have to be knowledgeable about the various disease and how to identify them visually. Even then, it is an impossible task for farmers to survey the vast farmlands on a daily basis. Even if this is possible, it becomes a costly task that will, in turn, increases the price of rice for consumers. Machine learning algorithms fitted to drone technology combined with the Internet of Things (IoT) can offer a solution to this problem. In this paper, we propose a Deep Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN) transfer learning-based approach for the accurate detection and classification of rice leaf disease. The modified proposed approach includes a modified VGG19-based transfer learning method. The proposed modified system can accurately detect and diagnose six distinct classes: healthy, narrow brown spot, leaf scald, leaf blast, brown spot, and bacterial leaf blight. The highest average accuracy is 96.08% using the non-normalized augmented dataset. The corresponding precision, recall, specificity, and F1-score were 0.9620, 0.9617, 0.9921, and 0.9616, respectively. The proposed modified approach achieved significantly better results compared with similar approaches using the same dataset or similar-size datasets reported in the extant literature.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations237
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlantsSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207