Image-to-Image Translation-Based Data Augmentation for Improving Crop/Weed Classification Models for Precision Agriculture Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Applications of deep-learning models in machine visions for crop/weed identification have remarkably upgraded the authenticity of precise weed management. However, compelling data are required to obtain the desired result from this highly data-driven operation. This study aims to curtail the effort needed to prepare very large image datasets by creating artificial images of maize (Zea mays) and four common weeds (i.e., Charlock, Fat Hen, Shepherd’s Purse, and small-flowered Cranesbill) through conditional Generative Adversarial Networks (cGANs). The fidelity of these synthetic images was tested through t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE) visualization plots of real and artificial images of each class. The reliability of this method as a data augmentation technique was validated through classification results based on the transfer learning of a pre-defined convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture—the AlexNet; the feature extraction method came from the deepest pooling layer of the same network. Machine learning models based on a support vector machine (SVM) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) were trained using these feature vectors. The F1 scores of the transfer learning model increased from 0.97 to 0.99, when additionally supported by an artificial dataset. Similarly, in the case of the feature extraction technique, the classification F1-scores increased from 0.93 to 0.96 for SVM and from 0.94 to 0.96 for the LDA model. The results show that image augmentation using generative adversarial networks (GANs) can improve the performance of crop/weed classification models with the added advantage of reduced time and manpower. Furthermore, it has demonstrated that generative networks could be a great tool for deep-learning applications in agriculture.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".