Sensitivity examination of YOLOv4 regarding test image distortion and training dataset attribute for apple flower bud classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Applications of convolutional neural network (CNN)-based object detectors in agriculture have been a popular research topic in recent years. However, complicated agricultural environments bring many difficulties for ground truth annotation as well as potential uncertainties for image data quality. Using YOLOv4 as a representation of state-of-the-art object detectors, this study quantified YOLOv4’s sensitivity against artificial image distortions including white noise, motion blur, hue shift, saturation change, and intensity change, and examined the importance of various training dataset attributes based on model classification accuracies, including dataset size, label quality, negative sample presence, image sequence, and image distortion levels. The YOLOv4 model trained and validated on the original datasets failed at 31.91% white noise, 22.05-pixel motion blur, 77.38° hue clockwise shift, 64.81° hue counterclockwise shift, 89.98% saturation decrease, 895.35% saturation increase, 79.80% intensity decrease, and 162.71% intensity increase with 30% mean average precisions (mAPs) for four apple flower bud growth stages. The performance of YOLOv4 decreased with both declining training dataset size and training image label quality. Negative samples and training image sequence did not make a substantial difference in model performance. Incorporating distorted images during training improved the classification accuracies of YOLOv4 models on noisy test datasets by 13 to 390%. In the context of apple flower bud growth-stage classification, except for motion blur, YOLOv4 is sufficiently robust for potential image distortions by white noise, hue shift, saturation change, and intensity change in real life. Training image label quality and training instance number are more important factors than training dataset size. Exposing models to test-image-alike training images is crucial for optimal model classification accuracies. The study enhances understanding of implementing object detectors in agricultural research.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".