Cited by 61Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsSmart Agriculture and AI

Automatic detection of snow breakage at single tree level using YOLOv5 applied to UAV imagery

Open access
Puliti, Stefano, Astrup, Rasmus·2022·International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation

Abstract

The assessment of forest abiotic damages such as snow breakage is important to ensure compensation to forest owners. Currently, information on the extent of snow breakage is gathered through time-consuming and potentially biased field surveys. In such situations where field surveys are still common practice, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are increasingly being used to provide a more cost-efficient and objective methods to answer forest information needs. Further, the advent of sophisticated computer vision techniques such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs) offers new ways to analyze image data more efficiently and accurately. We proposed an object detection method to automatically identify trees and classify them according to the damage by snow based on a YOLO CNN architecture. UAV imagery collected across 89 study areas and over the course of the entire year were manually annotated into a total of >55 K single trees classified as healthy, damaged, or dead. The annotated trees, along with the corresponding UAV imagery were used to train a YOLOv5 object detection model. Furthermore, we tested the effect of seasonality, and varying atmospheric and lighting conditions on the model’s performance. Based on an independent test set of data we found that the general model including all of the data (i.e. any seasons, atmospheric conditions, and time of the day) outperformed all other tested scenarios (i.e. precision = 62 %; recall = 61 %). Furthermore, we found that despite the fact that the snow damaged trees represented a minority class (i.e. 16 % of the annotated trees), they were detected with the largest precision (76 %) and recall (78 %). Finally, the general model transferred well across the variation in seasons, atmospheric and illumination conditions, making it suitable for usage for any new UAV image acquisition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jag.2022.102946

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Puliti, S., & Astrup, R.
Affiliations
Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research (NO)
Corresponding author
Puliti, Stefano
Venue
International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-08
Volume
112
Pages
102946
ISSN
  • 0303-2434 (ISSN-L)
  • 1569-8432
OpenAlex
W4292101693
Cited by
61
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 2
FWCI
4.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Norges forskningsråd
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Smart Agriculture and AI
Keywords
YOLOv5, object detection, UAV imagery, tree detection, seasonal variation, model transferability, minority class detection

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