Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40594974›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Monitoring and predicting cotton leaf diseases using deep learning approaches and mathematical models.

Abdul Rehman, Nadeem Akhtar, Omar H Alhazmi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Abdul RehmanFaculty of Computing Science, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan. rehmanbn@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4855-5000
Nadeem AkhtarFaculty of Computing Science, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2475-5590
Omar H AlhazmiDepartment of Computer Science, Taibah University, Medina, 30001, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6158-1801

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cotton, the backbone of global textile production, demands sustainable agricultural practices to ensure fiber, food, and environmental security. Cotton crop play an essential role in farming economies; however, production is sometimes affected by various diseases that harm production. We proposed a methodology that uses formal modeling and verification for requirements confirmation to improve the monitoring and detection of cotton crop diseases. The correct information and requirements about disease symptoms can improve disease monitoring and prediction. The Temporal Logic of Action (TLA+) is used to construct a mathematical model to verify requirements by providing disease symptoms and then model checking to ensure correctness properties. Using model checking in TLA + ensures the reliability and correctness of disease symptom detection. We consequently used deep learning models to predict cotton diseases, i.e., Aphids, Armyworms, Bacterial Blight, Powdery Mildew, Target Spot, and Healthy leaf. Our results show that the Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) model achieved an overall accuracy of 98.7% with class-specific accuracy ranging from with F1-scores across all classes (e.g., 0.90 for Powdery Mildew and 0.87 for Army Worm).

Indexed as

Deep LearningGossypiumModels, TheoreticalPlant DiseasesPlant LeavesNeural Networks, ComputerConvolutional neural network (CNN)CorrectnessCotton cropDeep learning (DL)Formal modelingFormal verificationLong short term memory (LSTM)MonitoringPredictionRecurrent neural network (RNN)ReliabilityRequirement verificationTemporal logicTemporal logic of actions (TLA+)

Identifiers

PMID40594974
PMCPMC12219678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.