IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v11y2021i10p997-d655104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Study of Semantic Segmentation Models for Identification of Grape with Different Varieties

Author

Listed:
  • Yun Peng

    (Key Laboratory of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology, Ministry of Education, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China
    School of Electronic Engineering, Changzhou College of Information Technology, Changzhou 213164, China)

  • Aichen Wang

    (Key Laboratory of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology, Ministry of Education, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Jizhan Liu

    (Key Laboratory of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology, Ministry of Education, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Muhammad Faheem

    (Key Laboratory of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology, Ministry of Education, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

Abstract

Accurate fruit segmentation in images is the prerequisite and key step for precision agriculture. In this article, aiming at the segmentation of grape cluster with different varieties, 3 state-of-the-art semantic segmentation networks, i.e., Fully Convolutional Network (FCN), U-Net, and DeepLabv3+ applied on six different datasets were studied. We investigated: (1) the segmentation performance difference of the 3 studied networks; (2) The impact of different input representations on segmentation performance; (3) The effect of image enhancement method to improve the poor illumination of images and further improve the segmentation performance; (4) The impact of the distance between grape clusters and camera on segmentation performance. The experiment results show that compared with FCN and U-Net the DeepLabv3+ combined with transfer learning is more suitable for the task with an intersection over union ( IoU ) of 84.26%. Five different input representations, namely RGB, HSV, L*a*b, HHH, and YCrCb obtained different IoU , ranging from 81.5% to 88.44%. Among them, the L*a*b got the highest IoU . Besides, the adopted Histogram Equalization (HE) image enhancement method could improve the model’s robustness against poor illumination conditions. Through the HE preprocessing, the IoU of the enhanced dataset increased by 3.88%, from 84.26% to 88.14%. The distance between the target and camera also affects the segmentation performance, no matter in which dataset, the closer the distance, the better the segmentation performance was. In a word, the conclusion of this research provides some meaningful suggestions for the study of grape or other fruit segmentation.

Suggested Citation

  • Yun Peng & Aichen Wang & Jizhan Liu & Muhammad Faheem, 2021. "A Comparative Study of Semantic Segmentation Models for Identification of Grape with Different Varieties," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:10:p:997-:d:655104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/10/997/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/10/997/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jinzhu Lu & Juncheng Xiang & Ting Liu & Zongmei Gao & Min Liao, 2022. "Sichuan Pepper Recognition in Complex Environments: A Comparison Study of Traditional Segmentation versus Deep Learning Methods," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Shuzhi Su & Runbin Chen & Xianjin Fang & Yanmin Zhu & Tian Zhang & Zengbao Xu, 2022. "A Novel Lightweight Grape Detection Method," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:10:p:997-:d:655104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.