A comprehensive review of 3D convolutional neural network-based classification techniques of diseased and defective crops using non-UAV-based hyperspectral images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyperspectral imaging (HSI) is a non-destructive and contactless technology that provides valuable information about the structure and composition of an object. It can capture detailed information about the chemical and physical properties of agricultural crops. Due to its wide spectral range, compared with multispectral- or RGB-based imaging methods, HSI can be a more effective tool for monitoring crop health and productivity. With the advent of this imaging tool in agrotechnology, researchers can more accurately address issues related to the detection of diseased and defective crops in the agriculture industry. This allows to implement the most suitable and accurate farming solutions, such as irrigation and fertilization before crops enter a damaged and difficult-to-recover phase of growth in the field. While HSI provides valuable insights into the object under investigation, the limited number of HSI datasets for crop evaluation presently poses a bottleneck. Dealing with the curse of dimensionality presents another challenge due to the abundance of spectral and spatial information in each hyperspectral cube. State-of-the-art methods based on 1D- and 2D-CNNs struggle to efficiently extract spectral and spatial information. On the other hand, 3D-CNN-based models have shown significant promise in achieving better classification and detection results by leveraging spectral and spatial features simultaneously. Despite the apparent benefits of 3D-CNN-based models, their usage for classification purposes in this area of research has remained limited. This paper seeks to address this gap by reviewing 3D-CNN-based architectures and the typical deep learning pipeline, including preprocessing and visualization of results, for the classification of hyperspectral images of diseased and defective crops. Furthermore, we discuss open research areas and challenges when utilizing 3D-CNNs with HSI data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".