↓ Skip to main content

Classification of CITES-listed and other neotropical Meliaceae wood images using convolutional neural networks

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Methods, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
Title
Classification of CITES-listed and other neotropical Meliaceae wood images using convolutional neural networks
Published in
Plant Methods, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13007-018-0292-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Prabu Ravindran, Adriana Costa, Richard Soares, Alex C. Wiedenhoeft

Abstract

The current state-of-the-art for field wood identification to combat illegal logging relies on experienced practitioners using hand lenses, specialized identification keys, atlases of woods, and field manuals. Accumulation of this expertise is time-consuming and access to training is relatively rare compared to the international demand for field wood identification. A reliable, consistent and cost effective field screening method is necessary for effective global scale enforcement of international treaties such as the Convention on the International Trade in Endagered Species (CITES) or national laws (e.g. the US Lacey Act) governing timber trade and imports. We present highly effective computer vision classification models, based on deep convolutional neural networks, trained via transfer learning, to identify the woods of 10 neotropical species in the family Meliaceae, including CITES-listed Swietenia macrophylla, Swietenia mahagoni, Cedrela fissilis, and Cedrela odorata. We build and evaluate models to classify the 10 woods at the species and genus levels, with image-level model accuracy ranging from 87.4 to 97.5%, with the strongest performance by the genus-level model. Misclassified images are attributed to classes consistent with traditional wood anatomical results, and our species-level accuracy greatly exceeds the resolution of traditional wood identification. The end-to-end trained image classifiers that we present discriminate the woods based on digital images of the transverse surface of solid wood blocks, which are surfaces and images that can be prepared and captured in the field. Hence this work represents a strong proof-of-concept for using computer vision and convolutional neural networks to develop practical models for field screening timber and wood products to combat illegal logging.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 23 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 35%
Computer Science 11 13%
Engineering 5 6%
Environmental Science 4 5%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 26 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,843,455
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#760
of 1,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,109
of 331,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#17
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,089 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 331,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.