ArticlePloS one2026
Interpretable crop pest and disease identification based on comparative concept tree.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
Deep learning provides new methods for crop pest and disease identification and control, offering unique advantages in terms of recognition accuracy and efficiency. However, deep learning models generally lack interpretability, and their internal decision-making processes are difficult to understand. This, to some extent, undermines users' trust in the model's predictions and hinders its large-scale application in agricultural production. Therefore, improving model transparency and interpretability has become an important research direction. To address this issue, this study proposes a novel interpretable crop pest and disease identification model, the Contrastive Prototype Tree (CPTR). The model is designed around the core structure of "concept prototypes and decision tree," which builds clear prototype matching paths for each recognition result. This enables the model to not only have strong classification capability but also provide intuitive explanations. Additionally, the study introduces the SimCLR contrastive learning framework to enhance the model's ability to express deep image features. SimCLR guides the model to learn more discriminative visual features by maximizing the similarity between positive sample pairs and minimizing the similarity between negative sample pairs, thereby improving overall recognition performance. This study evaluated the model on three datasets: AppleLeaf9, Cassava, and Cashew. The experimental results show that CPTR achieves accuracies of 83.74%, 94.80%, and 96.01% on the three datasets, representing improvements of 4.12%, 0.34%, and 0.51% compared to Prototype Tree, respectively. These results indicate that the proposed model achieves the highest accuracy across different datasets, demonstrating its effectiveness.
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.