LettuceNet: A Novel Deep Learning Approach for Efficient Lettuce Localization and Counting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional lettuce counting relies heavily on manual labor, which is laborious and time-consuming. In this study, a simple and efficient method for localization and counting lettuce is proposed, based only on lettuce field images acquired by an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) equipped with an RGB camera. In this method, a new lettuce counting model based on the weak supervised deep learning (DL) approach is developed, called LettuceNet. The LettuceNet network adopts a more lightweight design that relies only on point-level labeled images to train and accurately predict the number and location information of high-density lettuce (i.e., clusters of lettuce with small planting spacing, high leaf overlap, and unclear boundaries between adjacent plants). The proposed LettuceNet is thoroughly assessed in terms of localization and counting accuracy, model efficiency, and generalizability using the Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Sciences-Lettuce (SAAS-L) and the Global Wheat Head Detection (GWHD) datasets. The results demonstrate that LettuceNet achieves superior counting accuracy, localization, and efficiency when employing the enhanced MobileNetV2 as the backbone network. Specifically, the counting accuracy metrics, including mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), normalized root mean square error (nRMSE), and coefficient of determination (R2), reach 2.4486, 4.0247, 0.0276, and 0.9933, respectively, and the F-Score for localization accuracy is an impressive 0.9791. Moreover, the LettuceNet is compared with other existing widely used plant counting methods including Multi-Column Convolutional Neural Network (MCNN), Dilated Convolutional Neural Networks (CSRNets), Scale Aggregation Network (SANet), TasselNet Version 2 (TasselNetV2), and Focal Inverse Distance Transform Maps (FIDTM). The results indicate that our proposed LettuceNet performs the best among all evaluated merits, with 13.27% higher R2 and 72.83% lower nRMSE compared to the second most accurate SANet in terms of counting accuracy. In summary, the proposed LettuceNet has demonstrated great performance in the tasks of localization and counting of high-density lettuce, showing great potential for field application.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".