Iterative image segmentation of plant roots for high-throughput phenotyping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate segmentation of root system architecture (RSA) from 2D images is an important step in studying phenotypic traits of root systems. Various approaches to image segmentation exist but many of them are not well suited to the thin and reticulated structures characteristic of root systems. The findings presented here describe an approach to RSA segmentation that takes advantage of the inherent structural properties of the root system, a segmentation network architecture we call ITErRoot. We have also generated a novel 2D root image dataset which utilizes an annotation tool developed for producing high quality ground truth segmentation of root systems. Our approach makes use of an iterative neural network architecture to leverage the thin and highly branched properties of root systems for accurate segmentation. Rigorous analysis of model properties was carried out to obtain a high-quality model for 2D root segmentation. Results show a significant improvement over other recent approaches to root segmentation. Validation results show that the model generalizes to plant species with fine and highly branched RSA's, and performs particularly well in the presence of non-root objects.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".