Comparative Evaluation of Color Correction as Image Preprocessing for Olive Identification under Natural Light Using Cell Phones

Abstract

Integrating deep learning for crop monitoring presents opportunities and challenges, particularly in object detection under varying environmental conditions. This study investigates the efficacy of image preprocessing methods for olive identification using mobile cameras under natural light. The research is grounded in the broader context of enhancing object detection accuracy in variable lighting, which is crucial for practical applications in precision agriculture. The study primarily employs the YOLOv7 object detection model and compares various color correction techniques, including histogram equalization (HE), adaptive histogram equalization (AHE), and color correction using the ColorChecker. Additionally, the research examines the role of data augmentation methods, such as image and bounding box rotation, in conjunction with these preprocessing techniques. The findings reveal that while all preprocessing methods improve detection performance compared to non-processed images, AHE is particularly effective in dealing with natural lighting variability. The study also demonstrates that image rotation augmentation consistently enhances model accuracy across different preprocessing methods. These results contribute significantly to agricultural technology, highlighting the importance of tailored image preprocessing in object detection models. The conclusions drawn from this research offer valuable insights for optimizing deep learning applications in agriculture, particularly in scenarios with inconsistent environmental conditions.

Highly Accurate and Lightweight Detection Model of Apple Leaf Diseases Based on YOLO

“…In order to assess the differences in the performance of the two groups of models, YOLOv5s vs. YOLOv5-Res and YOLOv5n vs. YOLOv5-Res4, in the target detection task, this study used a paired samples t-test to analyze their performance on the mAP@0.5 metric [47]. The significance level of this test was set at a p-value of < 0.05 to ensure that the observed differences were statistically significant.…”