Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42324274›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Performance evaluation of AkidaNet converted to spiking domain for the classification of weeds in cotton fields.

Mrudula Jeeva, Santhosh Miriala

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Mrudula JeevaAnurag University, Venkatapur, Ghatkesar Rd, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500088, India. mrudulasandesh@gmail.com.
Santhosh MirialaAnurag University, Venkatapur, Ghatkesar Rd, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500088, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The infestation of weeds in cotton fields poses a serious threat to the production of lint. Weeds are eliminated either by spraying weed kill sprays, or removal by hand, or by automated machinery. Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models are used in these machines for weed classification and detection. Compared with machine learning models, DL models based on neural networks have greater ability to extract features. A spiking neural network (SNN) is used in this paper for the classification of weed images commonly found in cotton fields. The classification of the 6 classes of weeds is accomplished via transfer learning on the AkidaNet Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) model, which is converted to an SNN via software tools from BrainChip. The process includes quantization of the parameters to achieve compatibility for conversion and eventual deployment on neuromorphic devices. The classification accuracy and loss metrics are presented for the training and validation data. The accuracy and loss values achieved during training were 96.26% and 26.67% for the training data and 93.58% and 31.16% for the validation data respectively. Prior to conversion to the SNN, during quantization, the accuracy achieved is 87.96%. With the inclusion of Quantization Aware Training (QAT), the accuracy improved to 90.74%. After conversion from the CNN to the SNN, the model accuracy obtained for the testing data was 94.44%. The results demonstrate that SNN-based models can achieve good classification accuracy with reduced computational cost, making them suitable for deployment on energy-efficient neuromorphic systems. This approach holds strong potential for real-time automated weed detection in precision cotton agriculture.

Indexed as

GossypiumPlant WeedsClassification AlgorithmsConvolutional Neural NetworksDeep LearningMachine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerCotton weedsDeep learningImage classificationSpiking neural network

Identifiers

PMID42324274
PMCPMC13529717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.