imageseg: An R package for deep learning‐based image segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and deep learning are powerful and robust tools for ecological applications, and are particularly suited for image data. Image segmentation (the classification of all pixels in images) is one such application and can, for example, be used to assess forest structural metrics. While CNN‐based image segmentation methods for such applications have been suggested, widespread adoption in ecological research has been slow, likely due to technical difficulties in implementation of CNNs and lack of toolboxes for ecologists. Here, we present R package imageseg which implements a CNN‐based workflow for general purpose image segmentation using the U‐Net and U‐Net++ architectures in R. The workflow covers data (pre)processing, model training and predictions. We illustrate the utility of the package with image recognition models for two forest structural metrics: tree canopy density and understorey vegetation density. We trained the models using large and diverse training datasets from a variety of forest types and biomes, consisting of 2877 canopy images (both canopy cover and hemispherical canopy closure photographs) and 1285 understorey vegetation images. Overall segmentation accuracy of the models was high with a Dice score of 0.91 for the canopy model and 0.89 for the understorey vegetation model (assessed with 821 and 367 images respectively). The image segmentation models performed significantly better than commonly used thresholding methods, and generalized well to data from study areas not included in training. This indicates robustness to variation in input images and good generalization strength across forest types and biomes. The package and its workflow allow simple yet powerful assessments of forest structural metrics using pretrained models. Furthermore, the package facilitates custom image segmentation with single or multiple classes and based on colour or grayscale images, for example, for applications in cell biology or for medical images. Our package is free, open source and available from CRAN. It will enable easier and faster implementation of deep learning‐based image segmentation within R for ecological applications and beyond.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.069 | 0.058 |
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".