4.7 Article

A Field Weed Density Evaluation Method Based on UAV Imaging and Modified U-Net

Journal

REMOTE SENSING
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs13020310

Keywords

semantic segmentation; U-net; UAV; weed density

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Project of China [2019YFB1312303]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposed a method for evaluating weed density in the field using UAV images. By segmenting green plants and bare land, as well as segmenting crops, weed images were obtained and density was calculated. Experimental results showed high accuracy of the weed density evaluation, providing critical information for precision weeding.
Weeds are one of the main factors affecting the yield and quality of agricultural products. Accurate evaluation of weed density is of great significance for field management, especially precision weeding. In this paper, a weed density calculating and mapping method in the field is proposed. An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) was used to capture field images. The excess green minus excess red index, combined with the minimum error threshold segmentation method, was used to segment green plants and bare land. A modified U-net was used to segment crops from images. After removing the bare land and crops from the field, images of weeds were obtained. The weed density was evaluated by the ratio of weed area to total area on the segmented image. The accuracy of the green plant segmentation was 93.5%. In terms of crop segmentation, the intersection over union (IoU) was 93.40%, and the segmentation time of a single image was 35.90 ms. Finally, the determination coefficient of the UAV evaluated weed density and the manually observed weed density was 0.94, and the root mean square error was 0.03. With the proposed method, the weed density of a field can be effectively evaluated from UAV images, hence providing critical information for precision weeding.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available