ArticleScientific reports2025
Harnessing hyperspectral imaging and machine learning techniques for accurate discrimination of peanut plants and weeds.
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 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Effective weed detection for precise management remains a pertinent issue in modern agriculture. In this study, hyperspectral imaging (HSI) was combined with machine learning (ML) to differentiate between peanut plants and four common weeds found in peanut fields. Several spectral preprocessing methods-Moving Window Averaging (MWA), Median Filtering (MF), Gaussian Filtering (GF), and Savitzky-Golay smoothing (SGS)-were applied. Feature selection algorithms, including Correlation-based feature selection (CFS), Principal Components Analysis (PCA), and Wrapper Feature Selection (WFS), were then used to extract the most informative wavelengths. Among the various classifiers evaluated, the combination of MF preprocessing, WFS algorithm, and LDA classifier (MF-WFS-LDA) achieved the best performance, while the WFS method selected 12 optimal wavelengths from a total of 465. The accuracy, precision, recall, and RMSE values of this model in the training stage were 99.71%, 0.997, 0.997, and 0.054, respectively. These statistics were 96.67%, 0.967, 0.968, and 0.088, respectively, in the test stage. Furthermore, it successfully differentiated peanuts from each weed species using a minimal number of optimal wavelengths. These findings highlight the potential of integrating HSI with ML for precise weed detection in peanut cultivation. However, further validation under diverse environmental and field conditions is recommended.
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.