↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosis of Typical Apple Diseases: A Deep Learning Method Based on Multi-Scale Dense Classification Network

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, October 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Diagnosis of Typical Apple Diseases: A Deep Learning Method Based on Multi-Scale Dense Classification Network
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, October 2021
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2021.698474
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yunong Tian, En Li, Zize Liang, Min Tan, Xiongkui He

Abstract

Disease has always been one of the main reasons for the decline of apple quality and yield, which directly harms the development of agricultural economy. Therefore, precise diagnosis of apple diseases and correct decision making are important measures to reduce agricultural losses and promote economic growth. In this paper, a novel Multi-scale Dense classification network is adopted to realize the diagnosis of 11 types of images, including healthy and diseased apple fruits and leaves. The diagnosis of different kinds of diseases and the same disease with different grades was accomplished. First of all, to solve the problem of insufficient images of anthracnose and ring rot, Cycle-GAN algorithm was applied to achieve dataset expansion on the basis of traditional image augmentation methods. Cycle-GAN learned the image characteristics of healthy apples and diseased apples to generate anthracnose and ring rot lesions on the surface of healthy apple fruits. The diseased apple images generated by Cycle-GAN were added to the training set, which improved the diagnosis performance compared with other traditional image augmentation methods. Subsequently, DenseNet and Multi-scale connection were adopted to establish two kinds of models, Multi-scale Dense Inception-V4 and Multi-scale Dense Inception-Resnet-V2, which facilitated the reuse of image features of the bottom layers in the classification neural networks. Both models accomplished the diagnosis of 11 different types of images. The classification accuracy was 94.31 and 94.74%, respectively, which exceeded DenseNet-121 network and reached the state-of-the-art level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Lecturer 2 5%
Researcher 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 21 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 13%
Engineering 2 5%
Mathematics 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 21 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2021.
All research outputs
#16,889,961
of 24,833,726 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#12,515
of 23,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,016
of 426,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#429
of 839 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,833,726 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,725 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,975 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 839 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.