ArticlePloS one2025
Utilizing CNNs for classification and uncertainty quantification for 15 families of European fly pollinators.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pollination is essential for maintaining biodiversity and ensuring food security, and in Europe it is primarily mediated by four insect orders (Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera). However, traditional monitoring methods are costly and time consuming. Although recent automation efforts have focused on butterflies and bees, flies, a diverse and ecologically important group of pollinators, have received comparatively little attention, likely due to the challenges posed by their subtle morphological differences. In this study, we investigate the application of Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) for classifying 15 European pollinating fly families and quantifying the associated classification uncertainty. In curating our dataset, we ensured that the images of Diptera captured diverse visual characteristics relevant for classification, including wing morphology and general body habitus. We evaluated the performance of three CNNs, ResNet18, MobileNetV3, and EfficientNetB4 and estimated the prediction confidence using Monte Carlo methods, combining test-time augmentation and dropout to approximate both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. We demonstrate the effectiveness of these models in accurately distinguishing fly families. We achieved an overall accuracy of up to 95.61%, with a mean relative increase in accuracy of 5.58% when comparing uncropped to cropped images. Furthermore, cropping images to the Diptera bounding boxes not only improved classification performance across all models but also increased mean prediction confidence by 8.56%, effectively reducing misclassifications among families. This approach represents a significant advance in automated pollinator monitoring and has promising implications for both scientific research and practical applications.
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.