PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Successes and limitations of pretrained YOLO detectors applied to unseen time-lapse images for automated pollinator monitoring.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Ștefan, V.* ; Stark, T.* ; Wurm, M.* ; Taubenbock, H.* ; Knight, T.M.*

Successes and limitations of pretrained YOLO detectors applied to unseen time-lapse images for automated pollinator monitoring.

Sci. Rep. 15 (2025)

Verlagsversion

DOI

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

Pollinating insects provide essential ecosystem services, and using time-lapse photography to automate their observation could improve monitoring efficiency. Computer vision models, trained on clear citizen science photos, can detect insects in similar images with high accuracy, but their performance in images taken using time-lapse photography is unknown. We evaluated the generalisation of three lightweight YOLO detectors (YOLOv5-nano, YOLOv5-small, YOLOv7-tiny), previously trained on citizen science images, for detecting ~ 1,300 flower-visiting arthropod individuals in nearly 24,000 time-lapse images captured with a fixed smartphone setup. These field images featured unseen backgrounds and smaller arthropods than the training data. YOLOv5-small, the model with the highest number of trainable parameters, performed best, localising 91.21% of Hymenoptera and 80.69% of Diptera individuals. However, classification recall was lower (80.45% and 66.90%, respectively), partly due to Syrphidae mimicking Hymenoptera and the challenge of detecting smaller, blurrier flower visitors. This study reveals both the potential and limitations of such models for real-world automated monitoring, suggesting they work well for larger and sharply visible pollinators but need improvement for smaller, less sharp cases.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

3.900

0.000