
Image Segmentation Method of Chinese Yam Leaves in Complex Background Based on Improved ENet
LU Bibo, LIANG Di, YANG Jie, SONG Aiqing, HUANGFU Shangwei
Image Segmentation Method of Chinese Yam Leaves in Complex Background Based on Improved ENet
[Objective] Crop leaf area is an important indicator reflecting light absorption efficiency and growth conditions. This paper established a diverse Chinese yam image dataset and proposesd a deep learning-based method for Chinese yam leaf image segmentation. This method can be used for real-time measurement of Chinese yam leaf area, addressing the inefficiency of traditional measurement techniques. This will provide more reliable data support for genetic breeding, growth and development research of Chinese yam, and promote the development and progress of the Chinese yam industry. [Methods] A lightweight segmentation network based on improved ENet was proposed. Firstly, based on ENet, the third stage was pruned to reduce redundant calculations in the model. This improved the computational efficiency and running speed, and provided a good basis for real-time applications. Secondly, PConv was used instead of the conventional convolution in the downsampling bottleneck structure and conventional bottleneck structure, the improved bottleneck structure was named P-Bottleneck. PConv applied conventional convolution to only a portion of the input channels and left the rest of the channels unchanged, which reduced memory accesses and redundant computations for more efficient spatial feature extraction. PConv was used to reduce the amount of model computation while increase the number of floating-point operations per second on the hardware device, resulting in lower latency. Additionally, the transposed convolution in the upsampling module was improved to bilinear interpolation to enhance model accuracy and reduce the number of parameters. Bilinear interpolation could process images smoother, making the processed images more realistic and clear. Finally, coordinate attention (CA) module was added to the encoder to introduce the attention mechanism, and the model was named CBPA-ENet. The CA mechanism not only focused on the channel information, but also keenly captured the orientation and position-sensitive information. The position information was embedded into the channel attention to globally encode the spatial information, capturing the channel information along one spatial direction while retaining the position information along the other spatial direction. The network could effectively enhance the attention to important regions in the image, and thus improve the quality and interpretability of segmentation results. [Results and Discussions] Trimming the third part resulted in a 28% decrease in FLOPs, a 41% decrease in parameters, and a 9 f/s increase in FPS. Improving the upsampling method to bilinear interpolation not only reduces the floating-point operation and parameters, but also slightly improves the segmentation accuracy of the model, increasing FPS by 4 f/s. Using P-Bottleneck instead of downsampling bottleneck structure and conventional bottleneck structure can reduce mIoU by only 0.04%, reduce FLOPs by 22%, reduce parameters by 16%, and increase FPS by 8 f/s. Adding CA mechanism to the encoder could only increase a small amount of FLOPs and parameters, improving the accuracy of the segmentation network. To verify the effectiveness of the improved segmentation algorithm, classic semantic segmentation networks of UNet, DeepLabV3+, PSPNet, and real-time semantic segmentation network LinkNet, DABNet were selected to train and validate. These six algorithms got quite high segmentation accuracy, among which UNet had the best mIoU and the mPA, but the model size was too large. The improved algorithm only accounts for 1% of the FLOPs and 0.41% of the parameters of UNet, and the mIoU and mPA were basically the same. Other classic semantic segmentation algorithms, such as DeepLabV3+, had similar accuracy to improved algorithms, but their large model size and slow inference speed were not conducive to embedded development. Although the real-time semantic segmentation algorithm LinkNet had a slightly higher mIoU, its FLOPs and parameters count were still far greater than the improved algorithm. Although the PSPNet model was relatively small, it was also much higher than the improved algorithm, and the mIoU and mPA were lower than the algorithm. The experimental results showed that the improved model achieved a mIoU of 98.61%. Compared with the original model, the number of parameters and FLOPs significantly decreased. Among them, the number of model parameters decreased by 51%, the FLOPs decreased by 49%, and the network operation speed increased by 38%. [Conclusions] The improved algorithm can accurately and quickly segment Chinese yam leaves, providing not only a more accurate means for determining Chinese yam phenotype data, but also a new method and approach for embedded research of Chinese yam. Using the model, the morphological feature data of Chinese yam leaves can be obtained more efficiently, providing a reliable foundation for further research and analysis.
Chinese yam / image segmentation / deep learning / ENet / partial convolution / CA mechanism {{custom_keyword}} /
Table 1 Classification of data collected from indoor Chinese yam leaves表1 室内山药叶片采集数据分类 |
序号 | 品种名称 | 数量/张 | 序号 | 品种名称 | 数量/张 | 序号 | 品种名称 | 数量/张 | 序号 | 品种名称 | 数量/张 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 砀山山药 | 45 | 11 | 嵩野2号 | 49 | 21 | 太和长芋 | 42 | 31 | 南京采药 | 34 |
2 | 梅岱山药 | 39 | 12 | 靳家岭山药 | 37 | 22 | 安顺山药 | 48 | 32 | 山东牛腿米 | 36 |
3 | 僵野1号 | 47 | 13 | 惠楼山药 | 48 | 23 | 山王庄铁棍 | 30 | 33 | 泌阳野山药 | 40 |
4 | 苏北淮山药 | 45 | 14 | 辉县太行山药 | 50 | 24 | 宿生野山药 | 46 | 34 | 太古8号 | 30 |
5 | 日本山药 | 34 | 15 | 临泉笨山药 | 37 | 25 | 平遥山药 | 30 | 35 | 新城细毛 | 33 |
6 | 太原8号 | 34 | 16 | 双胞山药 | 33 | 26 | 山西榆次山药 | 43 | 36 | 怀山药1号 | 34 |
7 | 温科3号 | 37 | 17 | 2018 -1号山药 | 46 | 27 | 四川雅山药 | 41 | 37 | 铁棍雌株 | 33 |
8 | 安顺2号 | 46 | 18 | 桑县10号 | 34 | 28 | 砀山山药2号 | 41 | 38 | 神农山山药 | 36 |
9 | 小白嘴山药 | 36 | 19 | 铁棍山药1号 | 31 | 29 | 白玉山药 | 39 | 39 | 日本白山药 | 35 |
10 | 安顺5号 | 32 | 20 | 丰县铁棍山药 | 41 | 30 | 白皮山药 | 36 | 40 | 陇山药1号 | 30 |
Table 2 Data enhancement statistics for the training set of Chinese yam images表2 山药叶片研究训练集数据增强统计 |
类别 | 初始数量/张 | 数据增强 | 最终数量/张 |
---|---|---|---|
室内 | 1 077 | 是 | 1 500 |
室外 | 129 | 是 | 1 032 |
总计 | 1 206 | — | 2 532 |
Table 3 Ablation experiments on segmentation of yam leaves images表3 山药叶片图像分割消融实验 |
Test No. | Model | mIoU/% | mPA/% | Accuracy/% | FPS/(f/s) | Inference time/ms | FLOPs/G | Params/ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | ENet | 98.58 | 99.24 | 99.57 | 50 | 20.00 | 2.178 | 0.3492 |
1 | C-ENet | 98.48 | 99.19 | 99.54 | 59 | 18.87 | 1.563 | 0.2046 |
2 | CB-ENet | 98.53 | 99.23 | 99.55 | 63 | 15.87 | 1.428 | 0.1995 |
3 | CP-ENet | 98.45 | 99.18 | 99.53 | 68 | 14.71 | 1.295 | 0.1758 |
4 | CPB-ENet | 98.49 | 99.25 | 99.53 | 71 | 14.08 | 1.112 | 0.1681 |
5 | CPBA-ENet | 98.61 | 99.32 | 99.62 | 69 | 14.49 | 1.114 | 0.1714 |
Fig. 11 Comparison of the relationship between FLOPs and mIoU of different models图11 不同模型FLOPs与mIoU关系对比图 |
Fig. 12 Comparison of the relationship between Params and mIoU of different models图12 不同模型Params与mIoU关系对比图 |
Table 4 Comparison of segmentation performance of Chinese yam leaves using different models表4 不同模型的山药叶片分割性能比较 |
Model | mIoU/% | mPA/% | Accuracy/% | FPS/(f/s) | FLOPs/G | Params/M |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UNet | 99.09 | 99.57 | 99.72 | 17 | 92.0 | 43.9 |
DeepLabV3+ | 98.58 | 99.35 | 99.57 | 31 | 83.4 | 54.7 |
PSPNet | 97.45 | 98.67 | 99.22 | 23 | 61.6 | 49.1 |
LinkNet | 98.65 | 99.41 | 99.63 | 58 | 12.1 | 11.5 |
DABNet | 98.23 | 99.26 | 99.05 | 62 | 5.3 | 0.8 |
CBPA-ENet | 98.61 | 99.32 | 99.62 | 69 | 1.1 | 0.2 |
1 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
2 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
3 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
4 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
5 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
6 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
7 |
温建荣. 山药传统生产与现代生产的区别与比较[J]. 江西农业, 2018(18): 14.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
8 |
王永乐. 让"科研之花"结出山药"产业之果"[N]. 河南日报, 2024-03-17(13).
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
9 |
郝雅洁, 张吴平, 史维杰, 等. 基于计算机视觉的小麦叶面积测量[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2019, 58(16): 129-132.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
10 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
11 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
12 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
13 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
14 |
李方一, 黄璜, 官春云. 作物叶面积测量的研究进展[J]. 湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 47(3): 274-282.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
15 |
崔世钢, 秦建华. 图像处理法测定油菜叶面积的研究[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2017, 56(14): 2756-2757, 2767.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
16 |
于东玉, 冯天祥, 李奕昕, 等. 基于植物图像的活体叶片面积测量方法研究与实现[J]. 智能计算机与应用, 2019, 9(4): 173-176.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
17 |
李秋洁, 杨远明, 袁鹏成, 等. 基于饱和度分割的叶面积图像测量方法[J]. 林业工程学报, 2021, 6(4): 147-152.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
18 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
19 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
20 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
21 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
22 |
陈从平, 钮嘉炜, 丁坤, 等. 基于深度学习的马铃薯病害智能识别[J]. 计算机仿真, 2023, 40(2): 214-217, 222.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
23 |
杜鹏飞, 黄媛, 高欣娜, 等. 基于语义分割的复杂背景下黄瓜叶部病害严重程度分级研究[J]. 中国农机化学报, 2023, 44(11): 138-147.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
24 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
25 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
26 |
管博伦, 张立平, 朱静波, 等. 农业病虫害图像数据集构建关键问题及评价方法综述[J]. 智慧农业(中英文), 2023, 5(3): 17-34.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
27 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
28 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
29 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
30 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
31 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
32 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
{{custom_ref.label}} |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
/
〈 |
|
〉 |