Cited by 313Smart Agriculture and AIAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsWeed Control and Herbicide Applications

YOLOWeeds: A novel benchmark of YOLO object detectors for multi-class weed detection in cotton production systems

Dang, Fengying, Chen, Dong, Lu, Yuzhen, Li, Zhaojian·2023·Computers and Electronics in Agriculture

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compag.2023.107655

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Dang, F., Chen, D., Lu, Y., & Li, Z.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Lu, Yuzhen
Venue
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-02
Volume
205
Pages
107655
ISSN
0168-1699 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4317513060
Cited by
313
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 85 · 2025: 112 · 2024: 86 · 2023: 30
FWCI
49.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture (publishedVersion)
Funders
Cotton Incorporated (21-005)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Smart Agriculture and AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Weed Control and Herbicide Applications
Keywords
weed detection, cotton production, benchmarking, herbicide resistance, weed control, YOLOv5, YOLOv4, data augmentation, Monte Carlo cross-validation, multi-class object detection, real-time detection, weed growth stage

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review