↓ Skip to main content

Plant Species Identification Using Computer Vision Techniques: A Systematic Literature Review

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#6 of 170)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
patent
3 patents
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
295 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
477 Mendeley
Title
Plant Species Identification Using Computer Vision Techniques: A Systematic Literature Review
Published in
Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11831-016-9206-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jana Wäldchen, Patrick Mäder

Abstract

Species knowledge is essential for protecting biodiversity. The identification of plants by conventional keys is complex, time consuming, and due to the use of specific botanical terms frustrating for non-experts. This creates a hard to overcome hurdle for novices interested in acquiring species knowledge. Today, there is an increasing interest in automating the process of species identification. The availability and ubiquity of relevant technologies, such as, digital cameras and mobile devices, the remote access to databases, new techniques in image processing and pattern recognition let the idea of automated species identification become reality. This paper is the first systematic literature review with the aim of a thorough analysis and comparison of primary studies on computer vision approaches for plant species identification. We identified 120 peer-reviewed studies, selected through a multi-stage process, published in the last 10 years (2005-2015). After a careful analysis of these studies, we describe the applied methods categorized according to the studied plant organ, and the studied features, i.e., shape, texture, color, margin, and vein structure. Furthermore, we compare methods based on classification accuracy achieved on publicly available datasets. Our results are relevant to researches in ecology as well as computer vision for their ongoing research. The systematic and concise overview will also be helpful for beginners in those research fields, as they can use the comparable analyses of applied methods as a guide in this complex activity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 477 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 476 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 73 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 13%
Student > Bachelor 49 10%
Researcher 38 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 5%
Other 61 13%
Unknown 169 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 116 24%
Engineering 59 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 51 11%
Environmental Science 23 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 2%
Other 42 9%
Unknown 175 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 December 2023.
All research outputs
#2,216,276
of 23,072,295 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering
#6
of 170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,841
of 421,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,072,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 170 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,579 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them