MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362474494 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2023.109108

Machine Learning Imagery Dataset for Maize Crop: A Case of Tanzania

2023· article· en· W4362474494 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Neema Mduma, Hudson Laizer

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStyrelsen för Internationellt UtvecklingssamarbeteMakerere UniversityHarbin University of Science and TechnologyInternational Development Research CentreRockefeller Foundation
KeywordsTanzaniaFood securityCash cropCropStaple foodStreakSegmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAgricultural engineeringGeographyAgronomyBiologyAgricultureEnvironmental planningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maize is one of the most important staple food and cash crops that are largely produced by majority of smallholder farmers throughout the humid and sub-humid tropic of Africa. Despite its significance in the household food security and income, diseases, especially Maize Lethal Necrosis and Maize Streak, have been significantly affecting production of this crop. This paper offers a dataset of well curated images of maize crop for both healthy and diseased leaves captured using smartphone camera in Tanzania. The dataset is the largest publicly accessible dataset for maize leaves with a total of 18,148 images, which can be used to develop machine learning models for the early detection of diseases affecting maize. Moreover, the dataset can be used to support computer vision applications such as image segmentation, object detection and classification. The goal of generating this dataset is to assist the development of comprehensive tools that will help farmers in the diagnosis of diseases and the enhancement of maize yields thus eradicating the problem of fod security in Tanzania and other parts in Africa.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207