MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327953249 · doi:10.3390/f14030619

TSBA-YOLO: An Improved Tea Diseases Detection Model Based on Attention Mechanisms and Feature Fusion

2023· article· en· W4327953249 on OpenAlexaff
Ji Lin, Di Bai, Renjie Xu, Haifeng Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceMechanism (biology)Pattern recognition (psychology)FusionMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tea diseases have a significant impact on the yield and quality of tea during the growth of tea trees. The shape and scale of tea diseases are variable, and the tea disease targets are usually small, with the intelligent detection processes of tea diseases also easily disturbed by the complex background of the growing region. In addition, some tea diseases are concentrated in the entire area of the leaves, needing to be inferred from global information. Common target detection models are difficult to solve these problems. Therefore, we proposed an improved tea disease detection model called TSBA-YOLO. We use the dataset of tea diseases collected at the Maoshan Tea Factory in China. The self-attention mechanism was used to enhance the ability of the model to obtain global information on tea diseases. The BiFPN feature fusion network and adaptively spatial feature fusion (ASFF) technology were used to improve the multiscale feature fusion of tea diseases and enhance the ability of the model to resist complex background interference. We integrated the Shuffle Attention mechanism to solve the problem of difficult identifications of small-target tea diseases. In addition, we used data-enhancement methods and transfer learning to expand the dataset and relocate the parameters learned from other plant disease datasets to enhance tea diseases detection. Finally, SIoU was used to further improve the accuracy of the regression. The experimental results show that the proposed model is good at solving a series of problems encountered in the intelligent recognition of tea diseases. The detection accuracy is ahead of the mainstream target detection models, and the detection speed reaches the real-time level.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations66
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207