MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408712625 · doi:10.1038/s41597-025-04456-4

Banana Leaves Imagery Dataset

2025· article· en· W4408712625 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Neema Mduma, Christian A. Elinisa

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research CentreStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsTanzaniaFusarium wiltAgricultureData collectionGeographyRace (biology)Computer scienceRemote sensingCartographyHorticultureBiologyBotanyEnvironmental planningStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we present a dataset of banana leaf imagery, both with and without diseases. The dataset consists of 11,767 images, categorized as follows: 3,339 healthy images, 3,496 images of leaves affected by Black Sigatoka and 4,932 images of leaves affected by Fusarium Wilt Race 1. This data was collected to support machine learning diagnostics for disease detection. The data collection process involved farmers, researchers, agricultural experts and plant pathologists from the northern and southern highland regions of Tanzania. To ensure unbiased representation, farms were randomly selected from the Rungwe, Mbeya, Arumeru, and Arusha districts, based on the presence of banana crops and the targeted diseases. The dataset offers a comprehensive collection of images captured from November 2022 to January 2023, using a high-resolution smartphone camera across a wide geographical area. Researchers and developers can use this dataset to build machine learning solutions that automatically detect diseases in images, potentially enabling agricultural stakeholders, including farmers, to diagnose Fusarium Wilt Race 1 and Black Sigatoka early and take timely action.

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)0.001
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 score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207