MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295308419 · doi:10.1109/icjece.2022.3178749

Detection of Curved Rows and Gaps in Aerial Images of Sugarcane Field Using Image Processing Techniques

2022· article· en· W4295308419 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSugarcane Cultivation and Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsRowImage processingSowingCropField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceAgricultural engineeringDimension (graph theory)MathematicsComputer scienceImage (mathematics)AgronomyEngineeringDatabaseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sugarcane is one of the main crops in the world due to its economic value promoted by the sale of its derivatives, such as bioethanol and sugar. In order to achieve greater economic performance and productivity in the sugarcane field, several digital image processing studies have been conducted on sugarcane field images. However, mapping and measuring gaps in the planting rows are still being performed manually on-site to determine whether to replant the entire area or only the gaps. High cost of time and manpower is required to perform the manual measurement. Based on that, the aim of this study is to present a novel method to detect crop rows and measure gaps in crop fields. Our method is also able to deal with curved crop rows, which is a real problem and substantially limits numerous solutions in practical applications. The proposed method is evaluated using a mosaic of real scene image that was prepared with the support of a small remotely piloted aircraft. Experimental tests showed a low relative error of approximately <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$1.65$</tex-math> </inline-formula> % compared to manual mapping in the planting regions, even for regions with gaps in the curved crop rows. It means that our proposal can identify and measure crop rows accurately, which enables automated inspections with high-precision measurements.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
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