ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Enhancing Grapevine Node Detection to Support Pruning Automation: Leveraging State-of-the-Art YOLO Detection Models for 2D Image Analysis.
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 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- SSViT-YOLOv11: fusing lightweight YOLO & ViT for coffee fruit maturity detection.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Automating pruning tasks entails overcoming several challenges, encompassing not only robotic manipulation but also environment perception and detection. To achieve efficient pruning, robotic systems must accurately identify the correct cutting points. A possible method to define these points is to choose the cutting location based on the number of nodes present on the targeted cane. For this purpose, in grapevine pruning, it is required to correctly identify the nodes present on the primary canes of the grapevines. In this paper, a novel method of node detection in grapevines is proposed with four distinct state-of-the-art versions of the YOLO detection model: YOLOv7, YOLOv8, YOLOv9 and YOLOv10. These models were trained on a public dataset with images containing artificial backgrounds and afterwards validated on different cultivars of grapevines from two distinct Portuguese viticulture regions with cluttered backgrounds. This allowed us to evaluate the robustness of the algorithms on the detection of nodes in diverse environments, compare the performance of the YOLO models used, as well as create a publicly available dataset of grapevines obtained in Portuguese vineyards for node detection. Overall, all used models were capable of achieving correct node detection in images of grapevines from the three distinct datasets. Considering the trade-off between accuracy and inference speed, the YOLOv7 model demonstrated to be the most robust in detecting nodes in 2D images of grapevines, achieving F1-Score values between 70% and 86.5% with inference times of around 89 ms for an input size of 1280 × 1280 px. Considering these results, this work contributes with an efficient approach for real-time node detection for further implementation on an autonomous robotic pruning system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.