Constructing segmentation method for wheat powdery mildew using deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Powdery mildew is an important factor affecting wheat yield and global food security as well as a leading factor restricting the sustainable development of agriculture. Timely and accurate segmentation of wheat powdery mildew image is an important practical significance for disease-resistant breeding and precise control. In this study, RSE-Swin Unet was proposed based on the Swin-Unet architecture to address the complex morphology of wheat powdery mildew lesions, blurred boundaries between lesions and non-lesions, and low segmentation accuracy. The method combines ResNet and SENet to solve the abovementioned problem. Firstly, the attention mechanism module SENet is introduced into Swin-Unet, which can effectively capture global and local features in images and extract more important information about powdery mildew. Secondly, the output of the SENet module add to the corresponding feature tensor of the decoder for subsequent decoder operations. Finally, in the deep bottleneck of Swin-Unet network, ResNet network layers are used to increase the expressive power of feature. The test results showed that in the experiment with the self-built wheat powdery mildew dataset, the proposed RSE-Swin Unet method achieved MIoU, mPA, and accuracy values of 84.01%, 89.96%, and 94.20%, respectively, which were 2.77%, 3.64%, and 2.89% higher than the original Swin-Unet method. In the wheat stripe rust dataset, the proposed RSE-Swin Unet method achieved MIOU, MPA, and accuracy values of 84.91%, 90.50%, and 96.88%, respectively, which were 4.64%, 5.38%, and 2.84% higher than those of the original Swin-Unet method. Compared with other mainstream deep learning methods U-Net, PSPNet, DeepLabV3+, and Swin-Unet, the proposed RSE Swin-Unet method can detect wheat powdery mildew and stripe rust image in a challenging situation and has good computer vision processing and performance evaluation effects. The proposed method can accurately detect the image of wheat powdery mildew and has good segmentation performance, which provides important support for the identification of resistance in wheat breeding materials.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".