MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409428728 · doi:10.1101/2025.04.08.647223

A General Method for Detection and Segmentation of Terrestrial Arthropods in Images

2025· preprint· en· W4409428728 on OpenAlex
Asger Svenning, G Mougeot, Jamie Alison, Daphne Chevalier, Nisa Luise Chavez Molina, Song‐Quan Ong, Kim Bjerge, Juli Carrillo, Toke T. Høye, Quentin Geissmann

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Imaging for Blood Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To better understand the status and trends of insects and other arthropods, emerging technologies like image recognition are developing rapidly. This is creating a strong demand for efficient and accurate algorithms for detection and localization of arthropods in images. Existing models have modest performance and do not generalise well to variation in scale, appearance and density of specimens, or imaging conditions. Consequently, each new application often requires manual labeling of training data and model training, which limits the uptake of image-based tools and technologies. Here, we introduce flatbug, which is a powerful and general model to count and outline insects and other terrestrial arthropods in images. The training dataset is large and diverse and represent 23 different lab- and field-based imaging systems. The best flatbug model achieves an average F1=94.2% on our validation dataset. Crucially, we show that flatbug has great out-of-the-box performance and generalises well to novel contexts. When images from a given dataset are left out of model training, the performance of flatbug is only reduced by on average 7.1% for the dataset in question. By using truly stratified cross-validation, we set a precedent for robust evaluation of deep learning model performance and generalization. We also take steps towards scale- and size-agnostic arthropod detection, by developing an integrated tiling framework for inference and training. Additionally, flatbug's implementation of YOLOv8 for instance segmentation enables downstream background removal and body size estimation. The generaliseability of flatbug stems from the diversity of contexts represented in the flatbug dataset, including 113550 arthropods annotated across 6131 images. Alongside a fully documented Python package with tutorials for integration and analysis via https://github.com/darsa-group/flat-bug/, the flatbug dataset is available from https://www.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14761447. By providing performant models and the accompanying dataset, flatbug offers both a ready-to-use tool and a benchmark for the future. Overall, flatbug represents a significant methodological advance within arthropod image detection, with user-friendly integration for monitoring and 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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.258 · 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