MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407597852 · doi:10.1016/j.compag.2025.110115

Alfalfa detection and stem count from proximal images using a combination of deep neural networks and machine learning

2025· article· en· W4407597852 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hazhir Bahrami, Karem Chokmani, Saeid Homayouni, Viacheslav I. Adamchuk, Md Saifuzzaman, Maxime Leduc

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers and Electronics in Agriculture · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsMcGill UniversityInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMitacs
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkDeep learningComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• The combination of semantic segmentation and machine learning models can effectively quantify alfalfa stems in an image. • Deep semantic segmentation models can be efficiently trained by combining synthetic and real images. • Synthetic images improve model generalization and significantly reduce the time spent on manual image annotation. • A simple deep U-Net model demonstrated superior performance in classifying alfalfa pixels compared to advanced ones. Among various types of forages, Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) is a crucial forage crop that plays a vital role in livestock nutrition and sustainable agriculture. As a result of its ability to adapt to different weather conditions and its high nitrogen fixation capability, this crop produces high-quality forage that contains between 15 and 22 % protein. It is fortunately possible to improve the overall prediction of forage biomass and quality prior to harvest through remote sensing technologies. The recent advent of deep Convolution Neural Networks (deep CNNs) enables researchers to utilize these incredible algorithms. This study aims to build a model to count the number of alfalfa stems from proximal images. To this end, we first utilized a deep CNN encoder-decoder to segment alfalfa and other background objects in a field, such as soil and grass. Subsequently, we employed the alfalfa cover fractions derived from the proximal images to develop and train machine learning regression models for estimating the stem count in the images. This study uses many proximal images taken from significant number of fields in four provinces of Canada over three consecutive years. A combination of real and synthetic images has been utilized to feed the deep neural network encoder-decoder. This study gathered roughly 3447 alfalfa images, 5332 grass images, and 9241 background images for training the encoder-decoder model. With data augmentation, we prepared about 60,000 annotated images of alfalfa fields containing alfalfa, grass, and background utilizing a pre-trained model in less than an hour. Several convolutional neural network encoder-decoder models have also been utilized in this study. Simple U-Net, Attention U-Net (Att U-Net), and ResU-Net with attention gates have been trained to detect alfalfa and differentiate it from other objects. The best Intersections over Union (IoU) for simple U-Net classes were 0.98, 0.93, and 0.80 for background, alfalfa and grass, respectively. Simple U-Net with synthetic data provides a promising result over unseen real images and requires an RGB iPad image for field-specific alfalfa detection. It was also observed that simple U-Net has slightly better accuracy than attention U-Net and attention ResU-Net. Finally, we built regression models between the alfalfa cover fraction in the original images taken by iPad, and the mean alfalfa stems per square foot. Random forest (RF), Support Vector Regression (SVR), and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) methods have been utilized to estimate the number of stems in the images. RF was the best model for estimating the number of alfalfa stems relative to other machine learning algorithms, with a coefficient of determination (R 2 ) of 0.82, root-mean-square error of 13.00, and mean absolute error of 10.07.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputers and Electronics in AgricultureSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207