| Literature DB >> 33897724 |
Xuewei Wang1, Jun Liu1.
Abstract
Greenhouse cultivation can improve crop yield and quality, and it not only solves people's daily needs but also brings considerable gains to the agricultural staff. One of the most widely cultivated greenhouse crops is tomato, mainly because of its high nutritional value and its good taste. However, there are a number of anomalies for the tomato crop that pose a threat for its greenhouse cultivation. Detection of tomato anomalies in the complex natural environment is an important research direction in the field of plant science. Automated identification of tomato anomalies is still a challenging task because of its small size and complex background. To solve the problem of tomato anomaly detection in the complex natural environment, a novel YOLO-Dense was proposed based on a one-stage deep detection YOLO framework. By adding a dense connection module in the network architecture, the network inference speed of the proposed model can be effectively improved. By using the K-means algorithm to cluster the anchor box, nine different sizes of anchor boxes with potential objects to be identified were obtained. The multiscale training strategy was adopted to improve the recognition accuracy of objects at different scales. The experimental results show that the mAP and detection time of a single image of the YOLO-Dense network is 96.41% and 20.28 ms, respectively. Compared with SSD, Faster R-CNN, and the original YOLOv3 network, the YOLO-Dense model achieved the best performance in tomato anomaly detection under a complex natural environment.Entities:
Keywords: DenseNet; deep learning; object detection; plant diseases recognition; real-field scenarios
Year: 2021 PMID: 33897724 PMCID: PMC8063041 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2021.634103
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
FIGURE 1Schematic diagram for improving the YOLOv3 model 2.1 YOLO-Dense network design.
FIGURE 2The system structure.
FIGURE 3YOLO-Dense network model.
FIGURE 4Structure of dense modules of the YOLO-Dense network.
FIGURE 5IoU schematic. (A) IoU=0.7. (B) IoU=0.95.
FIGURE 6The relationship between the IoU and K.
FIGURE 7Schematic diagram of the multiscale training process.
Selection of key parameters.
| Parameter name | Parameter value |
| Batch size | 64 |
| Learning rate | 0.0026 |
| Decay | 0.0054 |
| Momentum | 0.9 |
| Factor | 0.1 |
FIGURE 8Precision–Recall curves of the proposed model at four different image resolutions.
Algorithm performance under different resolutions.
| Resolution | mAP (%) | Detection time/(ms) |
| 320 × 320 | 90.26 | 17.68 |
| 416 × 416 | 92.32 | 18.99 |
| 544 × 544 | 96.40 | 20.27 |
| 608 × 608 | 96.98 | 29.98 |
Comparison of detection accuracy (AP) (%).
| Disease/pest | SSD | Faster R-CNN | The original YOLOv3 | YOLO-Dense |
| Early blight | 85.46 | 91.35 | 90.84 | 96.71 |
| Late blight | 85.67 | 91.22 | 90.67 | 96.68 |
| Yellow leaf curl virus | 84.78 | 91.17 | 89.98 | 96.28 |
| Brown spot | 85.19 | 91.08 | 89.69 | 93.98 |
| Coal pollution | 85.03 | 91.26 | 90.52 | 96.86 |
| Gray mold | 84.99 | 91.41 | 90.17 | 96.78 |
| Leaf mold | 85.11 | 90.96 | 89.65 | 96.56 |
| Navel rot | 85.79 | 90.89 | 89.37 | 96.55 |
| Leaf curl disease | 84.98 | 90.71 | 89.44 | 96.48 |
| Mosaic | 84.43 | 90.29 | 89.32 | 96.51 |
| Leaf miner | 79.12 | 86.31 | 85.38 | 94.95 |
| Greenhouse whitefly | 78.01 | 80.58 | 79.69 | 94.01 |
Comprehensive performance comparison.
| Algorithm name | mAP (%) | Time/(ms) | False detection rate (%) | Missed detection rate (%) |
| SSD | 84.32 | 25.69 | 1.38 | 1.29 |
| Faster R-CNN | 90.67 | 2868.94 | 1.87 | 1.97 |
| YOLO v3 | 88.31 | 21.18 | 1.05 | 1.14 |
| YOLO-Dense |