Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39065900›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Using Data Augmentation to Improve the Generalization Capability of an Object Detector on Remote-Sensed Insect Trap Images.

Jozsef Suto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

1 author.

Jozsef SutoDepartment of Informatics Systems and Networks, Faculty of Informatics, University of Debrecen, Kassai Street, 26, 4028 Debrecen, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0003-3155-5159

Funding

Tempus Public Foundation MAEO 2023-24 / 183910
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, monitoring insect populations involved the use of externally placed sticky paper traps, which were periodically inspected by a human operator. To automate this process, a specialized sensing device and an accurate model for detecting and counting insect pests are essential. Despite considerable progress in insect pest detector models, their practical application is hindered by the shortage of insect trap images. To attenuate the "lack of data" issue, the literature proposes data augmentation. However, our knowledge about data augmentation is still quite limited, especially in the field of insect pest detection. The aim of this experimental study was to investigate the effect of several widely used augmentation techniques and their combinations on remote-sensed trap images with the YOLOv5 (small) object detector model. This study was carried out systematically on two different datasets starting from the single geometric and photometric transformation toward their combinations. Our results show that the model's mean average precision value (mAP50) could be increased from 0.844 to 0.992 and from 0.421 to 0.727 on the two datasets using the appropriate augmentation methods combination. In addition, this study also points out that the integration of photometric image transformations into the mosaic augmentation can be more efficient than the native combination of augmentation techniques because this approach further improved the model's mAP50 values to 0.999 and 0.756 on the two test sets, respectively.

Indexed as

InsectaRemote Sensing TechnologyAlgorithmsAnimalsHumansImage Processing, Computer-Assistedautomated trapdata augmentationinsect countingYOLOv5

Identifiers

PMID39065900
PMCPMC11281147

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.