MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7114989640 · doi:10.1080/07038992.2025.2589553

An Effective Eichhornia Crassipes Growth Rate Detection and Segmentation Using Adaptive swinResUnet++

2025· article· en· W7114989640 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBiological Control of Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEichhornia crassipesHyacinthSegmentationBiomass (ecology)Image segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new Eichhornia crassipes spread detection mechanism is developed using an advanced deep learning strategy with multi-spectral images to identify the growth rate of the Eichhornia crassipes. Initially, the required multispectral images are acquired and given to the Intelligent 3D-Yolo Network (I3DYoloNet) is used for detecting the Eichhornia Crassipes. This detection finds whether the Eichhornia crassipes are present or not over a particular region. Here, the parameters from the I3DYoloNet are optimized using the developed Position Upgraded Tuna Swarm with Ageist Spider Monkey Optimization (PU-TSASMO). After detecting the Eichhornia crassipes, the detected region is segmented using the Adaptive SwinResUnet++ (ASRUnet++) for finding the growth rate of Eichhornia crassipes, where the parameters are tuned using the same PU-TSASMO. Segmentation yields the precise infested area in each image, and the growth rate is calculated by comparing this area across time-series images (with optional biomass conversion if needed). Here, the PU-TSASMO-ASRUnet++ achieves 96.52% accuracy, and the designed PU-TSASMO-I3DYoloNet attained 96.63%, which is higher than the other existing frameworks like FCM, KMeans, UNet, and swin_ResUNet++ on a Global Water Hyacinth Invasion database. The results obtained from the experiments are compared with the existing Eichhornia crassipes growth rate detection models to ensure the detection performance.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicBiological Control of Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207