ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Incorporating Uncertainty in Machine Learning Models to Improve Early Detection of Flavescence Dorée: A Demonstration of Applicability.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Early detection of Flavescence dorée leaf symptoms remains an open question for the research community. This work tries to fill this gap by proposing a methodology exploiting per-pixel data obtained from hyperspectral imaging to produce features suitable for machine learning training. However, since asymptomatic samples are similar to healthy samples, we propose "uncertainty-aware" models that address the probability of the samples being similar, thus producing, as output, an "unclassified" category when the uncertainty between multiple classes is too high. The original dataset of leaves hypercubes was collected in a field of Pinot Noir in northern Italy during 2023 and 2024, for a total of 201 hypercubes equally divided into three classes ("healthy", "asymptomatic", "diseased"). Feature predictors were 4 for each of the 10 vegetation indices (population quartiles 25-50-75 and population's mean), for a total of 40 predictors in total per leaf. Due to the low number of samples, it was not possible to estimate the uncertainty of the input data reliably. Thus, we adopted a double Monte Carlo procedure: First, we generated 30,000 synthetic hypercubes, thus computing the per class variance of each feature predictor. Second, we used this variance (serving as uncertainty of the input data) to generate 60,000 new predictors starting from the data in the test dataset. The trained models were therefore tested on these new data, and their predictions were further examined by a Bayesian test for validation purposes. It is highlighted that the proposed method notably improves recognition of "asymptomatic" samples with respect to the original models. The best model structure is the Decision Tree, achieving a prediction accuracy for "asymptomatic" samples of 75.7% against the original 49.3% for the Ensemble of Bagged Decision Trees (ML4) and of 44.6% against the original 13.2% for the Coarse Decision Tree (ML1).
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.