| Literature DB >> 32523613 |
Jun Liu1, Xuewei Wang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tomato gray leaf spot is a worldwide disease, especially in warm and humid areas. The continuous expansion of greenhouse tomato cultivation area and the frequent introduction of foreign varieties in recent years have increased the severity of the epidemic hazards of this disease in some tomato planting bases annually. This disease is a newly developed one. Thus, farmers generally lack prevention and control experience and measures in production; the disease is often misdiagnosed or not prevented and controlled timely; this condition results in tomato production reduction or crop failure, which causes severe economic losses to farmers. Therefore, tomato gray leaf spot disease should be identified in the early stage, which will be important in avoiding or reducing the economic loss caused by the disease. The advent of the era of big data has facilitated the use of machine learning method in disease identification. Therefore, deep learning method is proposed to realise the early recognition of tomato gray leaf spot. Tomato growers need to develop the app of image detection mobile terminal of tomato gray leaf spot disease to realise real-time detection of this disease.Entities:
Keywords: Convolutional neural network; Object detection; Tomato diseases and pests; YOLOv3
Year: 2020 PMID: 32523613 PMCID: PMC7281931 DOI: 10.1186/s13007-020-00624-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plant Methods ISSN: 1746-4811 Impact factor: 4.993
Datasets and size
| Dataset | Training set | Validation set | Test set | Total number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of images | 1669 | 477 | 239 | 2385 |
| Number of annotated samples | 9847 | 2814 | 1410 | 14,071 |
Fig. 1Diagram of two overlapping rectangles. The black rectangle represents the predicted bounding box, and the gray rectangle represents the original marked bounding box
Fig. 2Basic structure of depth-wise separable convolutional network a standard convolution filter; b depth-wise separable convolution filter; c point convolution filter
Configuration of experimental hardware environment
| Hardware name | Model | Number |
|---|---|---|
| Main board | Asus WS X299 SAGE | 1 |
| CPU | INTEL I7-9800X | 1 |
| Memory | The Kingston 16G DDR4 | 2 |
| Graphic card | GEFORCE GTX1080Ti | 2 |
| Solid-state drives | Kingston 256G | 1 |
| Hard disk | Western digital 1T | 1 |
Fig. 3Flowchart of tomato disease detection network training
Fig. 5P–R curve
Fig. 4Iteration curves. a Iteration curves of loss, b Iteration curves of average IoU
Comparison of detection results using different training methods
| Training methods | F1 score/ % | Average precision/ % | Average IoU/ % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Original method | 88.99 | 87.65 | 80.49 |
| Transfer learning method | 91.53 | 89.38 | 82.57 |
| Mixup + Transfer learning method | 92.72 | 90.29 | 83.13 |
Comparison of detection results using different backbone networks
| Network models | Backbone networks | F1 score/ % | Average precision/ % | Weight size | Detection speed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YOLOv2 | DarkNet-19 | 85.67 | 82.28 | 195 MB | 70 |
| YOLOv3 | DarkNet-53 | 91.77 | 88.52 | 236 MB | 62 |
| YOLOv3-Tiny | Tiny | 78.67 | 77.21 | 34 MB | 220 |
| YOLOv3 | MobileNetv1 | 88.37 | 86.49 | 23 MB | 270 |
| YOLOv3 | MobileNetv2 | 92.72 | 90.29 | 28 MB | 246 |
Detection results using GIoU loss function
| Network models | F1 score/ % | Average precision/ % | Average IoU/ % |
|---|---|---|---|
| YOLOv3 | 91.77 | 88.52 | 82.49 |
| MobileNetv2-YOLOv3 | 92.72 | 90.29 | 83.13 |
| GIoU + MobileNetv2-YOLOv3 | 93.24 | 91.32 | 86.98 |
Comparison of detection results under different backgrounds
| Test set | F1 score/ % | Average precision/ % | Average IoU/ % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficient light without leaf shelter | 94.13 | 92.53 | 89.92 |
| Sufficient light with leaf shelter | 93.22 | 91.01 | 87.86 |
| Insufficient light without leaf shelter | 91.32 | 90.07 | 85.52 |
| Insufficient light with leaf shelter | 90.61 | 90.02 | 84.31 |
Comparison of detection results using different network models
| Test set | Network models | F1 score/ % | Average precision/ % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficient light without leaf shelter | GIoU + MobileNetv2-YOLOv3 | 94.13 | 92.53 |
| SSD | 92.01 | 89.18 | |
| Faster-RCNN | 92.45 | 89.42 | |
| Sufficient light with leaf shelter | GIoU + MobileNetv2-YOLOv3 | 93.22 | 91.01 |
| SSD | 91.44 | 88.52 | |
| Faster-RCNN | 92.12 | 92.13 | |
| Insufficient light without leaf shelter | GIoU + MobileNetv2-YOLOv3 | 91.32 | 90.07 |
| SSD | 89.67 | 87.96 | |
| Faster-RCNN | 90.01 | 88.33 | |
| Insufficient light with leaf shelter | GIoU + MobileNetv2-YOLOv3 | 90.61 | 90.02 |
| SSD | 88.55 | 86.52 | |
| Faster-RCNN | 89.77 | 87.61 |
Fig. 6Effect diagram of the proposed detection method