Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39517671›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Enhancing Grapevine Node Detection to Support Pruning Automation: Leveraging State-of-the-Art YOLO Detection Models for 2D Image Analysis.

Francisco Oliveira, Daniel Queirós da Silva, Vítor Filipe, Tatiana Martins Pinho, Mário Cunha, José Boaventura Cunha, Filipe Neves Dos Santos

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Francisco OliveiraSchool of Science and Technology, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal.ORCID 0009-0003-2400-3601
Daniel Queirós da SilvaINESC Technology and Science (INESC TEC), 4200-465 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-9999-1550
Vítor FilipeSchool of Science and Technology, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3747-6577
Tatiana Martins PinhoINESC Technology and Science (INESC TEC), 4200-465 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1403-7221
Mário CunhaINESC Technology and Science (INESC TEC), 4200-465 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8299-324X
José Boaventura CunhaSchool of Science and Technology, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8406-0064
Filipe Neves Dos SantosINESC Technology and Science (INESC TEC), 4200-465 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8486-6113

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

AlgorithmsImage Processing, Computer-AssistedVitisAutomationRoboticsdeep learningprecision agriculturepruningrobotic systemsYOLO

Identifiers

PMID39517671
PMCPMC11548613

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.