Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38699404›Full record

ArticlePlant phenomics (Washington, D.C.)2024

Out-of-Distribution Detection Algorithms for Robust Insect Classification.

Mojdeh Saadati, Aditya Balu, Shivani Chiranjeevi, Talukder Zaki Jubery, Asheesh K Singh, Soumik Sarkar, Arti Singh, Baskar Ganapathysubramanian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Mojdeh SaadatiDepartment of Computer Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Aditya BaluDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Shivani ChiranjeeviDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Talukder Zaki JuberyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Asheesh K SinghDepartment of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Soumik SarkarDepartment of Computer Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Arti SinghDepartment of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Baskar GanapathysubramanianDepartment of Computer Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8931-4852

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plants encounter a variety of beneficial and harmful insects during their growth cycle. Accurate identification (i.e., detecting insects' presence) and classification (i.e., determining the type or class) of these insect species is critical for implementing prompt and suitable mitigation strategies. Such timely actions carry substantial economic and environmental implications. Deep learning-based approaches have produced models with good insect classification accuracy. Researchers aim to implement identification and classification models in agriculture, facing challenges when input images markedly deviate from the training distribution (e.g., images like vehicles, humans, or a blurred image or insect class that is not yet trained on). Out-of-distribution (OOD) detection algorithms provide an exciting avenue to overcome these challenges as they ensure that a model abstains from making incorrect classification predictions on images that belong to non-insect and/or untrained insect classes. As far as we know, no prior in-depth exploration has been conducted on the role of the OOD detection algorithms in addressing agricultural issues. Here, we generate and evaluate the performance of state-of-the-art OOD algorithms on insect detection classifiers. These algorithms represent a diversity of methods for addressing an OOD problem. Specifically, we focus on extrusive algorithms, i.e., algorithms that wrap around a well-trained classifier without the need for additional co-training. We compared three OOD detection algorithms: (a) maximum softmax probability, which uses the softmax value as a confidence score; (b) Mahalanobis distance (MAH)-based algorithm, which uses a generative classification approach; and (c) energy-based algorithm, which maps the input data to a scalar value, called energy. We performed an extensive series of evaluations of these OOD algorithms across three performance axes: (a) Base model accuracy: How does the accuracy of the classifier impact OOD performance? (b) How does the level of dissimilarity to the domain impact OOD performance? (c) Data imbalance: How sensitive is OOD performance to the imbalance in per-class sample size? Evaluating OOD algorithms across these performance axes provides practical guidelines to ensure the robust performance of well-trained models in the wild, which is a key consideration for agricultural applications. Based on this analysis, we proposed the most effective OOD algorithm as wrapper for the insect classifier with highest accuracy. We presented the results of its OOD detection performance in the paper. Our results indicate that OOD detection algorithms can significantly enhance user trust in insect pest classification by abstaining classification under uncertain conditions.

Identifiers

PMID38699404
PMCPMC11065417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.