Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Search Results (316)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = time-of-flight camera

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
27 pages, 7620 KiB  
Article
Maturity Prediction in Soybean Breeding Using Aerial Images and the Random Forest Machine Learning Algorithm
by Osvaldo Pérez, Brian Diers and Nicolas Martin
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(23), 4343; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16234343 - 21 Nov 2024
Viewed by 333
Abstract
Several studies have used aerial images to predict physiological maturity (R8 stage) in soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). However, information for making predictions in the current growing season using models fitted in previous years is still necessary. Using the Random Forest machine [...] Read more.
Several studies have used aerial images to predict physiological maturity (R8 stage) in soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). However, information for making predictions in the current growing season using models fitted in previous years is still necessary. Using the Random Forest machine learning algorithm and time series of RGB (red, green, blue) and multispectral images taken from a drone, this work aimed to study, in three breeding experiments of plant rows, how maturity predictions are impacted by a number of factors. These include the type of camera used, the number and time between flights, and whether models fitted with data obtained in one or more environments can be used to make accurate predictions in an independent environment. Applying principal component analysis (PCA), it was found that compared to the full set of 8–10 flights (R2 = 0.91–0.94; RMSE = 1.8–1.3 days), using data from three to five fights before harvest had almost no effect on the prediction error (RMSE increase ~0.1 days). Similar prediction accuracy was achieved using either a multispectral or an affordable RGB camera, and the excess green index (ExG) was found to be the important feature in making predictions. Using a model trained with data from two previous years and using fielding notes from check cultivars planted in the test season, the R8 stage was predicted, in 2020, with an error of 2.1 days. Periodically adjusted models could help soybean breeding programs save time when characterizing the cycle length of thousands of plant rows each season. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Pipeline workflow diagram of a high-throughput phenotyping platform for predicting soybean physiological maturity (R8 stage) of three breeding experiments (2018–2020) containing trials divided into plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines grown at the University of Illinois Research and Education Center near Savoy, IL. On the top right, overlapped on the satellite image, © Google, 2024 [<a href="#B31-remotesensing-16-04343" class="html-bibr">31</a>], three selected orthophotos corresponding to these experiments were taken from a drone on the same flight date (10 September). The colored polygons indicate the effective area of the soybean breeding blocks (trials) for which physiological maturity was predicted. The magnified orthophoto (10 September 2019) shows the cell grid that was used to associate the pixels within each cell to the day of the year in which the plant row reached the R8 stage.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Partial visualization of composed orthophotos obtained from time series of images taken from a drone flying over three soybean breeding experiments (2018–2020). The experiments, containing plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines, were grown at the University of Illinois Research and Education Center near Savoy, IL. The imagery was collected in a total of eight flight dates in 2018, ten in 2019, and nine in 2020, although only four flight dates per year are shown according to the best matching day of the year. The raster information within each cell grid was used to predict the day of the year the plant row reached physiological maturity. All the orthophotos show the three visual spectral bands (red, green, and blue); however, while the images were taken with a digital RGB camera in 2018, in 2019 and 2020, they were with a multispectral camera of five bands: red, green, blue, red edge, and near-infrared.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The histograms (in green) show the distribution of soybean physiological maturity (R8 stage) dates for three experiments of plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines grown at the University of Illinois Research and Education Center near Savoy, IL (2018–2020). The histograms (in blue) also show the distribution of the R8 stage dates, but according to what plant rows were assigned per individual (A–F) to take the field notes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The boxplots show the bias of predictions (days) for soybean physiological maturity (R8 stage) according to the individuals (A–F) who together took 9252, 11,742, and 11,197 field notes from three experiments: 2018 (<b>top</b>), 2019 (<b>middle</b>), and 2020 (<b>bottom</b>), respectively. The experiments contained plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines grown at the University of Illinois Research and Education Center near Savoy, IL. The Random Forest algorithm was used to adjust the predictive models using different training data sizes according to what plant rows were assigned per individual (A–F). The empty boxplot spaces mean that 44.2%, 28.5%, and 27.2% of field notes, taken respectively by A, B, and C, were used to train the models in 2018. In 2019, the proportions were 21.2%, 37.9%, 11.1%, 12.8%, and 17.0% (A, D–G); and in 2020, they were 45.3%, 19.6%, 17.5%, and 17.7% (A, B and C, D, and E).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Soybean physiological maturity (R8 stage) predictions corresponding to three breeding experiments containing plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines grown at the University of Illinois Research and Education Center near Savoy, IL (2018–2020). The Random Forest algorithm was applied to associate the field recorded values with three classification variables (breeding block, the individual who took the field notes, and the check cultivar) and 32 image features (red, green, blue, and a calculated excess green index —<span class="html-italic">ExG</span>—) obtained from eight drone flights. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) The relationship between predicted vs. field recorded values using all the field records, and (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) the same, but after filtering records of plant rows that reached the R8 stage after the last drone flight date (26, 24, and 30 September, respectively, for 2018, 2019, and 2020). An equal relationship training:test data ratio (80:20) was maintained for the three experiments (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = test data). The deviation of the regression line (blue) from the 1:1 line (gray) indicates the model’s prediction bias.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Variable importance measure of 15 most relevant variables for predicting soybean physiological maturity (R8 stage) of three experiments containing plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines grown at the University of Illinois Research and Education Center near Savoy, IL. Spectral bands extracted from time series of images taken from a drone and the excess green index (<span class="html-italic">ExG</span>) were included in the models as explanatory variables with three other classification variables: the breeding block (Block), the individual who took the field notes (Ind.), and the check cultivar (that does not show relevant importance). In 2018, the images were taken from a drone with a digital RGB (red, green, blue) camera, whereas in 2019 and 2020, they were taken with a multispectral camera. For the latter two years, the analyses were divided into using only the red (R), green (G), and blue (B) bands (simulating a digital RGB camera) and using the five spectral bands: R, G, B, R edge, and near-infrared (NIR).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Principal component analysis (PCA) of 32 variables belonging to a time series of RGB (red, green, blue) images and a calculated excess green index (<span class="html-italic">ExG</span>). The images were taken across eight drone flights carried out over a soybean breeding experiment (planted on 22 May 2018) containing plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines grown at the University of Illinois Research and Education Center near Savoy, IL. (<b>a</b>) Shows a regression analysis between PC1 scores and soybean physiological maturity (R8 stage); and (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">a posteriori</span> association between the response variable (R8 stage) and the image features, where A and S indicate August and September 2018, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Soybean physiological maturity (R8 stage) predictions for 2020 using four models trained with data from field recorded values collected from two previous experiments (2018–2019). The three experiments corresponded to breeding experiments containing plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines grown at the University of Illinois Research and Education Center near Savoy, IL. The four models were adjusted by applying the Random Forest algorithm to associate the field recorded values with a time series of the excess green index (<span class="html-italic">ExG</span>) and three classification variables (breeding block, the individual who took the field notes, and the check cultivar). Calculated from the red, green, and blue spectral bands, <span class="html-italic">ExG</span> was obtained from digital images taken with a drone. The four models were adjusted using the following training: test data relationship: (<b>a</b>) Training 2019:Test 2020 (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 51:49); (<b>b</b>) Training 2019<sub>plus 2020 checks</sub>:Test 2020<sub>wihout checks</sub> (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 53:47); (<b>c</b>) Training 2018–2019: Test 2020 (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 65:35); and (<b>d</b>) Training 2018–2019<sub>plus 2020 checks</sub>:Test 2020<sub>wihout checks</sub> (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 67:33). The deviation of the regression line (blue) from the 1:1 line (gray) indicates the model’s prediction bias. The table below the figures gives the data used to train the models in each figure (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Frequencies, (<b>b</b>) residuals, and (<b>c</b>) images showing prediction deviations for soybean physiological maturity (R8 stage) collected in a breeding experiment with plant rows of F<sub>4:5</sub> experimental lines in 2020. The mean residual (red line) indicates in (<b>b</b>) the prediction bias across time compared to predictions with zero bias from the observed R8 dates (gray dashed line). The images on the right show the excess green index (<span class="html-italic">ExG</span>), which is calculated with the red, green, and blue bands (images on the left). On the top of (<b>c</b>), the images show the three worst maturity predictions identified on (<b>b</b>); the bottom shows three examples considering predictions with an error of 2, 1, and 0 days from 30 September. The maturity predictions were carried out using a model (<a href="#remotesensing-16-04343-f008" class="html-fig">Figure 8</a>b) trained with data collected in a breeding experiment planted in 2019 (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 11,197) and in the eight check cultivars replicated in the 2020 experiment. The 2020 experiment minus the checks (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 11,197–493) was used to test the model, which was adjusted with the Random Forest algorithm using time series of <span class="html-italic">ExG</span> and three classification variables (breeding block, the individual who took the field notes, and the check cultivar).</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 7727 KiB  
Article
Effect of Climatological Factors on the Horizontal Accuracy of Photogrammetric Products Obtained with UAV
by Ana Luna Torres, Mónica Vergara Olivera, Alexandre Almeida Del Savio and Georgia Gracey Bambarén
Sensors 2024, 24(22), 7236; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24227236 - 13 Nov 2024
Viewed by 442
Abstract
The use of UAVs (drones) and photogrammetry has gained attention in recent years in the construction industry, allowing information to be obtained from a given area without having direct contact with the area, and thus, being a more efficient alternative in terms of [...] Read more.
The use of UAVs (drones) and photogrammetry has gained attention in recent years in the construction industry, allowing information to be obtained from a given area without having direct contact with the area, and thus, being a more efficient alternative in terms of time and costs when compared to a traditional topographic survey. Due to the increase in the use of UAVs for photogrammetry, an investigation is proposed to determine the influence of a non-controllable component in photogrammetric flights: the weather. Factors such as brightness, temperature, wind, KP index, and solar radiation affect the precision and quality of the images to be used in photogrammetry. This research determines which factors are most influential in these results through a varied database obtained over a year. In this way, the moments with the most favorable conditions for a photogrammetric flight in climates such as that of the city of Lima or similar are established. A total of 448 flights carried out over a year were analyzed, collecting climatic data such as air temperature, speed and wind direction, solar radiation, and KP index. The flights, which were carried out with a Mavic 2 Pro UAV, were carried out at 100 m high and with a camera at 90° to obtain detailed information on the works. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Remote Sensors)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Summary of climate in the study area during 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Control points location (GCP).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Brightness—Building 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Brightness—Building 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Temperature—Building 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Temperature—Building 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Wind speed—Building 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Wind speed—Building 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>KP index—Building 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>KP index—Building 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Solar radiation—Building 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Solar radiation—Building 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Most favorable factor ranges.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 3453 KiB  
Article
Autonomous UAV Chasing with Monocular Vision: A Learning-Based Approach
by Yuxuan Jin, Tiantian Song, Chengjie Dai, Ke Wang and Guanghua Song
Aerospace 2024, 11(11), 928; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace11110928 - 9 Nov 2024
Viewed by 382
Abstract
In recent years, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have shown significant potential across diverse applications, drawing attention from both academia and industry. In specific scenarios, UAVs are expected to achieve formation flying without relying on communication or external assistance. In this context, our work [...] Read more.
In recent years, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have shown significant potential across diverse applications, drawing attention from both academia and industry. In specific scenarios, UAVs are expected to achieve formation flying without relying on communication or external assistance. In this context, our work focuses on the classic leader-follower formation and presents a learning-based UAV chasing control method that enables a quadrotor UAV to autonomously chase a highly maneuverable fixed-wing UAV. The proposed method utilizes a neural network called Vision Follow Net (VFNet), which integrates monocular visual data with the UAV’s flight state information. Utilizing a multi-head self-attention mechanism, VFNet aggregates data over a time window to predict the waypoints for the chasing flight. The quadrotor’s yaw angle is controlled by calculating the line-of-sight (LOS) angle to the target, ensuring that the target remains within the onboard camera’s field of view during the flight. A simulation flight system is developed and used for neural network training and validation. Experimental results indicate that the quadrotor maintains stable chasing performance through various maneuvers of the fixed-wing UAV and can sustain formation over long durations. Our research explores the use of end-to-end neural networks for UAV formation flying, spanning from perception to control. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Aeronautics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The leader-follower system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The monocular camera model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The workflow of the learning-based unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) chasing control method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Obtaining fixed-wing UAV target from the image captured by monocular camera. Since the area occupied by the target fixed-wing UAV is relatively small in the images, we have enlarged it to enhance visibility.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Forward propagation of the vision follow net (VFNet). Parameters in the green rectangles are trainable.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The detailed architecture of the learning hidden unit contributions (LHUC) algorithm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The multi-head self-attention architecture used in the waypoint prediction module.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The leader-follower formation in the landing state is shown in the Gazebo simulator, with the fixed-wing UAV in a yellow box and the quadrotor UAV in an orange box.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The training loss curve.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The results of the waypoint prediction experiment. A smaller absolute value of deviation indicates better performance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The trajectories of straight flight.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The trajectories of clockwise spiral flight.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>The trajectories of counterclockwise spiral flight.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>The trajectories of turning from straight flight to an counterclockwise spiral flight.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The trajectories of turning from clockwise flight to counterclockwise spiral flight.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>The trajectories of long-term flight. In figure, the green line denotes the trajectory of the leader fixed-wing UAV, while the red line represents that of the follower quadrotor UAV.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>The results of waypoint prediction experiments with VFNet after removing the ResNet component. The smaller absolute value of deviation indicates better performance.</p>
Full article ">
25 pages, 7661 KiB  
Article
Application of Reinforcement Learning in Controlling Quadrotor UAV Flight Actions
by Shang-En Shen and Yi-Cheng Huang
Drones 2024, 8(11), 660; https://doi.org/10.3390/drones8110660 - 9 Nov 2024
Viewed by 547
Abstract
Most literature has extensively discussed reinforcement learning (RL) for controlling rotorcraft drones during flight for traversal tasks. However, most studies lack adequate details regarding the design of reward and punishment mechanisms, and there is a limited exploration of the feasibility of applying reinforcement [...] Read more.
Most literature has extensively discussed reinforcement learning (RL) for controlling rotorcraft drones during flight for traversal tasks. However, most studies lack adequate details regarding the design of reward and punishment mechanisms, and there is a limited exploration of the feasibility of applying reinforcement learning in actual flight control following simulation experiments. Consequently, this study focuses on the exploration of reward and punishment design and state input for RL. The simulation environment is constructed using AirSim and Unreal Engine, with onboard camera footage serving as the state input for reinforcement learning. The research investigates three RL algorithms suitable for discrete action training. The Deep Q Network (DQN), Advantage Actor–Critic (A2C), and Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) were combined with three different reward and punishment design mechanisms for training and testing. The results indicate that employing the PPO algorithm along with a continuous return method as the reward mechanism allows for effective convergence during the training process, achieving a target traversal rate of 71% in the testing environment. Furthermore, this study proposes integrating the YOLOv7-tiny object detection (OD) system to assess the applicability of reinforcement learning in real-world settings. Unifying the state inputs of simulated and OD environments and replacing the original simulated image inputs with a maximum dual-target approach, the experimental simulation achieved a target traversal rate of 52% ultimately. In summary, this research formulates a set of logical frameworks for an RL reward and punishment design deployed with real-time Yolo’s OD implementation synergized as a useful aid for related RL studies. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Markov Decision Process model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>DQN algorithm flowchart [<a href="#B15-drones-08-00660" class="html-bibr">15</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>A2C algorithm flowchart [<a href="#B17-drones-08-00660" class="html-bibr">17</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>PPO algorithm flowchart [<a href="#B19-drones-08-00660" class="html-bibr">19</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Picture of the training simulation environment. (<b>b</b>) The arrangement of the invisible walls as the electronic fence. (<b>c</b>) Test simulation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>State design for the scenario of drone flight with the first-person view when it is operated along the environment with the third-person view.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Action design.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Software architecture integration diagram.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Flowchart for the reinforcement learning system design.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Target passing area conceptual design diagram with the absolute distance arrow for approaching the frame and the normal vector arrow for leaving the frame.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>RIM mean episode length graph and mean reward graph.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>RCM mean episode length graph and mean reward graph.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>RCM target passing area conceptual design diagram.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>CRM mean episode length graph and mean reward graph.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>State design for the MSTM.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>MSTM mean episode length graph and mean reward graph.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>State design for the MTTM.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>MTTM mean episode length graph and mean reward graph.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Drone trajectory records.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Reward method design process.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 7134 KiB  
Article
Single-Handed Gesture Recognition with RGB Camera for Drone Motion Control
by Guhnoo Yun, Hwykuen Kwak and Dong Hwan Kim
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(22), 10230; https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210230 - 7 Nov 2024
Viewed by 406
Abstract
Recent progress in hand gesture recognition has introduced several natural and intuitive approaches to drone control. However, effectively maneuvering drones in complex environments remains challenging. Drone movements are governed by four independent factors: roll, yaw, pitch, and throttle. Each factor includes three distinct [...] Read more.
Recent progress in hand gesture recognition has introduced several natural and intuitive approaches to drone control. However, effectively maneuvering drones in complex environments remains challenging. Drone movements are governed by four independent factors: roll, yaw, pitch, and throttle. Each factor includes three distinct behaviors—increase, decrease, and neutral—necessitating hand gesture vocabularies capable of expressing at least 81 combinations for comprehensive drone control in diverse scenarios. In this paper, we introduce a new set of hand gestures for precise drone control, leveraging an RGB camera sensor. These gestures are categorized into motion-based and posture-based types for efficient management. Then, we develop a lightweight hand gesture recognition algorithm capable of real-time operation on even edge devices, ensuring accurate and timely recognition. Subsequently, we integrate hand gesture recognition into a drone simulator to execute 81 commands for drone flight. Overall, the proposed hand gestures and recognition system offer natural control for complex drone maneuvers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Aerospace Science and Engineering)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Overview of the HGR pipeline. Hand keypoints are estimated and input into two HGR models, which detect drone motion commands from hand gestures.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>An illustration of the manipulation of drone movement with a combination of hand gestures. When a user presents the stop gesture, no motion command is transmitted to the drone. Meanwhile, when presenting the neutral gesture, the drone movement is controlled by a combination of hand gestures.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Hand gesture examples for manipulation of roll and throttle. From the neutral position, the commands for both throttle and roll movements consist of the thumb, middle, and pinky fingers. The stop sign is excluded from this illustration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>An illustration demonstrating the manipulation of the yaw axis of the drone. When the hand rotates counterclockwise, the positive rotation angle causes the drone to turn left along the yaw axis. Conversely, the drone turns right if the rotation angle is negative.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Overview of the MLP architecture for the classification of the 21-keypoint sequence. The network comprises three dense blocks, one FC layer, and a softmax activation function. The input to the network consists of preprocessed, normalized relative keypoints; see <a href="#sec3dot1-applsci-14-10230" class="html-sec">Section 3.1</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Examples of motion-based hand gesture recognition. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) Pitch-related gestures: forward, neutral, and backward. (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) Yaw-related gestures: yaw_left, neutral, and yaw_right.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The confusion matrices of motion-based hand gesture recognition. (<b>a</b>) Pitch-related gestures. (<b>b</b>) Yaw-related gestures.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The confusion matrix of the posture-based hand gesture recognition model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>An illustrative scenario from the drone simulator demonstrates the application of the proposed hand gesture vocabulary in controlling a drone flight. In this example, the drone executes commands for ‘pitch forward’, ‘roll left’, and ‘yaw left’ simultaneously.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 11540 KiB  
Article
Autonomous Landing Strategy for Micro-UAV with Mirrored Field-of-View Expansion
by Xiaoqi Cheng, Xinfeng Liang, Xiaosong Li, Zhimin Liu and Haishu Tan
Sensors 2024, 24(21), 6889; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24216889 - 27 Oct 2024
Viewed by 540
Abstract
Positioning and autonomous landing are key technologies for implementing autonomous flight missions across various fields in unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) systems. This research proposes a visual positioning method based on mirrored field-of-view expansion, providing a visual-based autonomous landing strategy for quadrotor micro-UAVs (MAVs). [...] Read more.
Positioning and autonomous landing are key technologies for implementing autonomous flight missions across various fields in unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) systems. This research proposes a visual positioning method based on mirrored field-of-view expansion, providing a visual-based autonomous landing strategy for quadrotor micro-UAVs (MAVs). The forward-facing camera of the MAV obtains a top view through a view transformation lens while retaining the original forward view. Subsequently, the MAV camera captures the ground landing markers in real-time, and the pose of the MAV camera relative to the landing marker is obtained through a virtual-real image conversion technique and the R-PnP pose estimation algorithm. Then, using a camera-IMU external parameter calibration method, the pose transformation relationship between the UAV camera and the MAV body IMU is determined, thereby obtaining the position of the landing marker’s center point relative to the MAV’s body coordinate system. Finally, the ground station sends guidance commands to the UAV based on the position information to execute the autonomous landing task. The indoor and outdoor landing experiments with the DJI Tello MAV demonstrate that the proposed forward-facing camera mirrored field-of-view expansion method and landing marker detection and guidance algorithm successfully enable autonomous landing with an average accuracy of 0.06 m. The results show that this strategy meets the high-precision landing requirements of MAVs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Navigation and Positioning)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>MAV and onboard camera equipped with a mirrored field-of-view expansion lens.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Camera views after installing the lens.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Process of the vision-based autonomous landing method for MAV.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Coarse-to-fine landing marker recognition.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Virtual-real image conversion model based on mirror reflection.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Cross-sectional view of the mirrored field-of-view expansion lens.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The extrinsic parameters between the camera and IMU.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Procedure for calibrating the extrinsic parameters between the camera and IMU.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The PID control process for a MAV.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The average frame rate of landing marker recognition.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The process of the MAV’s indoor autonomous landing experiment: (<b>a</b>) the landing marker is captured in the forward view; (<b>b</b>) flying towards the landing marker; (<b>c</b>) gap in landing marker capture; (<b>d</b>) the marker is captured in the top view; (<b>e</b>) descending to the designated altitude; (<b>f</b>) displacing above the marker and then vertically landing.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The flight trajectory of the MAV’s indoor autonomous landing experiment: (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">X</span>-axis position; (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">Y</span>-axis position; (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">Z</span>-axis position; (<b>d</b>) three-axis flight trajectory during the approach and landing phases.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Diagram of MAV autonomous landing error.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>The process of the MAV’s outdoor autonomous landing experiment: (<b>a</b>) takeoff process; (<b>b</b>) hovering after increasing flight altitude; (<b>c</b>) autonomous landing approach process; (<b>d</b>) descending process; (<b>e</b>) move to the position above the marker; (<b>f</b>) vertical landing.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14 Cont.
<p>The process of the MAV’s outdoor autonomous landing experiment: (<b>a</b>) takeoff process; (<b>b</b>) hovering after increasing flight altitude; (<b>c</b>) autonomous landing approach process; (<b>d</b>) descending process; (<b>e</b>) move to the position above the marker; (<b>f</b>) vertical landing.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Dual-perspective images of the MAV’s outdoor autonomous landing experiment: (<b>a</b>) Forward view capturing the landing marker; (<b>b</b>) Blind spot between the forward and top views; (<b>c</b>) Top view capturing the outer ArUco marker; (<b>d</b>) Top view capturing the inner ArUco marker.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15 Cont.
<p>Dual-perspective images of the MAV’s outdoor autonomous landing experiment: (<b>a</b>) Forward view capturing the landing marker; (<b>b</b>) Blind spot between the forward and top views; (<b>c</b>) Top view capturing the outer ArUco marker; (<b>d</b>) Top view capturing the inner ArUco marker.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Flight trajectory of the MAV’s outdoor autonomous landing experiment: (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">X</span>-axis position; (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">Y</span>-axis position; (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">Z</span>-axis position; (<b>d</b>) Three-axis flight trajectory during the approach and landing phases.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16 Cont.
<p>Flight trajectory of the MAV’s outdoor autonomous landing experiment: (<b>a</b>) <span class="html-italic">X</span>-axis position; (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">Y</span>-axis position; (<b>c</b>) <span class="html-italic">Z</span>-axis position; (<b>d</b>) Three-axis flight trajectory during the approach and landing phases.</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 6763 KiB  
Article
Research on Surface Defect Positioning Method of Air Rudder Based on Camera Mapping Model
by Zeqing Yang, Kangni Xu, Mingxuan Zhang, Yingshu Chen, Ning Hu, Yi Zhang, Yi Jin and Yali Lv
Mathematics 2024, 12(20), 3191; https://doi.org/10.3390/math12203191 - 11 Oct 2024
Viewed by 688
Abstract
(1) Background: Air rudders are used to control the flight attitude of aircraft, and their surface quality directly affects flight accuracy and safety. (2) Method: Traditional positioning methods can only obtain defect location information at the image level but cannot determine the defect’s [...] Read more.
(1) Background: Air rudders are used to control the flight attitude of aircraft, and their surface quality directly affects flight accuracy and safety. (2) Method: Traditional positioning methods can only obtain defect location information at the image level but cannot determine the defect’s physical surface position on the air rudder, which lacks guidance for subsequent defect repair. We propose a defect physical surface positioning method based on a camera mapping model. (3) Results: Repeated positioning experiments were conducted on three typical surface defects of the air rudder, with a maximum absolute error of 0.53 mm and a maximum uncertainty of 0.26 mm. Through hardware systems and software development, the real-time positioning function for surface defects on the air rudder was realized, with the maximum axial positioning error for real-time defect positioning being 0.38 mm. (4) Conclusions: The proposed defect positioning method meets the required accuracy, providing a basis for surface defect repair in the air rudder manufacturing process. It also offers a new approach for surface defect positioning in similar products, with engineering application value. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Research in Image Processing and Optimization Methods)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Air rudder structure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Surface defects on the rudder surface: (<b>a</b>) cracks; (<b>b</b>) pits; (<b>c</b>) mould sticking.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Flowchart of air rudder surface defect location.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Workflow diagram illustrating the GrabCut algorithm [<a href="#B12-mathematics-12-03191" class="html-bibr">12</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Camera mapping transformation process.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Schematic representation of the coordinate system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Experimental platform.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Air rudder.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Surface mask of air rudder.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Surface segmentation result of air rudder.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Coordinate system for air rudder imaging.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Reconstruction residual diagram of the air rudder.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Segmentation mask diagram for air rudder surface defects.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Air rudder surface defect location diagram.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Calibration of the camera’s internal parameter matrix and distortion coefficients: (<b>a</b>) determining the position of the calibration plate in the camera coordinate system; (<b>b</b>) evaluating calibration errors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Calibration of the external parameter matrix for the camera: (<b>a</b>) Image acquisition process. (<b>b</b>) Corner point acquisition procedure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Flow chart for implementation of defect positioning function.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Interface for camera calibration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Interface for defect detection and location interface.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Defect repeat positioning error.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>IoU diagram.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 15447 KiB  
Article
Deep Learning for Generating Time-of-Flight Camera Artifacts
by Tobias Müller, Tobias Schmähling, Stefan Elser and Jörg Eberhardt
J. Imaging 2024, 10(10), 246; https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging10100246 - 8 Oct 2024
Viewed by 732
Abstract
Time-of-Flight (ToF) cameras are subject to high levels of noise and errors due to Multi-Path-Interference (MPI). To correct these errors, algorithms and neuronal networks require training data. However, the limited availability of real data has led to the use of physically simulated data, [...] Read more.
Time-of-Flight (ToF) cameras are subject to high levels of noise and errors due to Multi-Path-Interference (MPI). To correct these errors, algorithms and neuronal networks require training data. However, the limited availability of real data has led to the use of physically simulated data, which often involves simplifications and computational constraints. The simulation of such sensors is an essential building block for hardware design and application development. Therefore, the simulation data must capture the major sensor characteristics. This work presents a learning-based approach that leverages high-quality laser scan data to generate realistic ToF camera data. The proposed method employs MCW-Net (Multi-Level Connection and Wide Regional Non-Local Block Network) for domain transfer, transforming laser scan data into the ToF camera domain. Different training variations are explored using a real-world dataset. Additionally, a noise model is introduced to compensate for the lack of noise in the initial step. The effectiveness of the method is evaluated on reference scenes to quantitatively compare to physically simulated data. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>MCW-Net Architecture. The levels represent the size of the feature map. The stages consist of multiple blocks on the same level.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Samples from the Dataset. (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) industrial warehouse, (<b>c</b>) basement, and (<b>d</b>) office.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Standard Deviation as a function of the Angle of Incidence for wood (blue) and rigid foam (orange). Fitted curves are polynomials of degree 5.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) Basic corner geometry, (<b>b</b>) photo of the corner with the shifted cube, and (<b>c</b>) RGB images of the utilized materials from the dataset.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Depth image comparison between laser, actual ToF, and SimToF on the Corner Cube scene with material C.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Results on the Corner Scenes with Material C: (Top row) Color images with a green horizontal line indicating the vertical position of the plots. (Mid row) Cross-section plots at row 150. (Bottom row) Error map illustrating the difference between SimToF and the actual ToF (NaN values are colored black). The columns, from left to right, represent the following: Corner, Corner Cube, and Corner Cube shifted.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Depth image comparison of a real scene (NaN values are colored white).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Results on samples of the real scenes evaluation set: (Top row) Color images with a green horizontal line indicating the vertical position of the plots. (Mid row) Cross-section plots. (Bottom row) Error map illustrating the difference between SimToF and the actual ToF (NaN values are colored black). The columns, from left to right, represent individual scenes labeled as (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Visual comparison of PredToF (<b>middle</b> row) and SimToF (<b>bottom</b> row) on details of a horizontal cross-section plot at row 120 (<b>top</b> row, <b>right</b>). The utilized office scene from the evaluation set is displayed in color (<b>top</b> row, <b>left</b>), with a green horizontal line indicating the vertical position of all plots.Details of the Noise Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9 Cont.
<p>Visual comparison of PredToF (<b>middle</b> row) and SimToF (<b>bottom</b> row) on details of a horizontal cross-section plot at row 120 (<b>top</b> row, <b>right</b>). The utilized office scene from the evaluation set is displayed in color (<b>top</b> row, <b>left</b>), with a green horizontal line indicating the vertical position of all plots.Details of the Noise Model.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 8325 KiB  
Article
Estimation of Forage Biomass in Oat (Avena sativa) Using Agronomic Variables through UAV Multispectral Imaging
by Julio Urquizo, Dennis Ccopi, Kevin Ortega, Italo Castañeda, Solanch Patricio, Jorge Passuni, Deyanira Figueroa, Lucia Enriquez, Zoila Ore and Samuel Pizarro
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(19), 3720; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16193720 - 6 Oct 2024
Viewed by 1458
Abstract
Accurate and timely estimation of oat biomass is crucial for the development of sustainable and efficient agricultural practices. This research focused on estimating and predicting forage oat biomass using UAV and agronomic variables. A Matrice 300 equipped with a multispectral camera was used [...] Read more.
Accurate and timely estimation of oat biomass is crucial for the development of sustainable and efficient agricultural practices. This research focused on estimating and predicting forage oat biomass using UAV and agronomic variables. A Matrice 300 equipped with a multispectral camera was used for 14 flights, capturing 21 spectral indices per flight. Concurrently, agronomic data were collected at six stages synchronized with UAV flights. Data analysis involved correlations and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to identify significant variables. Predictive models for forage biomass were developed using various machine learning techniques: linear regression, Random Forests (RFs), Support Vector Machines (SVMs), and Neural Networks (NNs). The Random Forest model showed the best performance, with a coefficient of determination R2 of 0.52 on the test set, followed by Support Vector Machines with an R2 of 0.50. Differences in root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) among the models highlighted variations in prediction accuracy. This study underscores the effectiveness of photogrammetry, UAV, and machine learning in estimating forage biomass, demonstrating that the proposed approach can provide relatively accurate estimations for this purpose. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Application of Satellite and UAV Data in Precision Agriculture)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location of the field experiment and experimental design of six local oat varieties in Santa Ana, showing the ground control points (GCPs).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Description of the methodological framework employed in this research; DSM (Digital Surface Model); DTM (Digital Terrain Model); DHM (Digital Height Model).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>A</b>) DJI RTK V2 GNSS, (<b>B</b>) UAV Matrice 300, (<b>C</b>) Micasense Red Edge P camera, (<b>D</b>) flight plan, (<b>E</b>) ground control point (GCP), (<b>F</b>) evaluation plot, and (<b>G</b>) Calibrate Reflectance Panel (CRP).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Correlation coefficients between agronomic variables and spectral variables over time. r—Pearson correlation coefficient; significant at the 5% probability level; X = not significant.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Principal Component Analysis of agronomic and spectral variables.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The Taylor diagram compares the performance of linear regression (LM), Neural Network (NN), Random Forest (RF), and Support Vector Machine (SVM) models in predicting dry matter (dm) based on standard deviation, correlation coefficient, and RMSE for both training and test datasets.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Representation of dry matter estimated through prediction models for oat cultivation.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 5517 KiB  
Article
Vegetation Type Preferences in Red Deer (Cervus elaphus) Determined by Object Detection Models
by Annika Fugl, Lasse Lange Jensen, Andreas Hein Korsgaard, Cino Pertoldi and Sussie Pagh
Drones 2024, 8(10), 522; https://doi.org/10.3390/drones8100522 - 26 Sep 2024
Viewed by 838
Abstract
This study investigates the possibility of utilising a drone equipped with a thermal camera to monitor the spatial distribution of red deer (Cervus elaphus) and to determine their behavioural patterns, as well as preferences for vegetation types in a moor in [...] Read more.
This study investigates the possibility of utilising a drone equipped with a thermal camera to monitor the spatial distribution of red deer (Cervus elaphus) and to determine their behavioural patterns, as well as preferences for vegetation types in a moor in Denmark. The spatial distribution of red deer was mapped according to time of day and vegetation types. Reed deer were separated manually from fallow deer (Dama dama) due to varying footage quality. Automated object detection from thermal camera footage was used to identification of two behaviours, “Eating” and “Lying”, enabling insights into the behavioural patterns of red deer in different vegetation types. The results showed a migration of red deer from the moors to agricultural fields during the night. The higher proportion of time spent eating in agricultural grass fields compared to two natural vegetation types, “Grey dune” and “Decalcified fixed dune”, indicates that fields are important foraging habitats for red deer. The red deer populations were observed significantly later on grass fields compared to the natural vegetation types. This may be due to human disturbance or lack of randomisation of the flight time with the drone. Further studies are suggested across different seasons as well as the time of day for a better understanding of the annual and diurnal foraging patterns of red deer. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Drone Advances in Wildlife Research: 2nd Edition)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Red deer (doe) exhibiting its distinctive elongated facial structure, (<b>b</b>) fallow deer (doe) exhibiting its shorter facial structure, small ears, and slim legs, (<b>c</b>) red deer (doe) exhibiting its distinctive long ears, and (<b>d</b>) fallow deer (doe) exhibiting its white markings around the neck and on their backside.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) Confusion matrix of behaviours produced from predictions of validation dataset. Dark blue along the diagonal line from top left to bottom right indicates better prediction performance. (<b>b</b>) The development of model precision, recall, mAP50 (mean average precision with union threshold 0.5), and mAP50-95 (mean average precision with union threshold from 0.5 to 0.95), which are depicted on y-axes and epochs are depicted on the x-axis are executed. Points indicate the value of the metrics and dotted lines are fitted lines. (<b>c</b>) Precision-confidence curves for all individual behaviours and for all behaviours together, with each behaviour represented by a distinct colour. (<b>d</b>) Recall-confidence curves for all individual behaviours and for all behaviours, with each behaviour represented by a distinct colour.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>A map of the area covered in Lyngby Hede, with a reference map of Denmark indicating the study location. Each point corresponds to an observation of deer. The dashed square outlines the area covered in <a href="#drones-08-00522-f004" class="html-fig">Figure 4</a>. Various vegetation types are distinguished by distinct colours, with overlaps in vegetation types in intermediate colours. Deer species are graphically represented as red deer (circles), fallow deer (triangles), and unknown deer (crosses). A colour gradient indicates observation time, from white (earlier) to dark red (latest). The magnitude of deer population observations is represented by the size of the respective symbols (circle, triangle, and cross), with larger symbols denoting larger populations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>A magnified view of the map from <a href="#drones-08-00522-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a>, focusing on an area with multiple observations across diverse fields, is presented. A reference map of Denmark shows the study location. Forest areas are depicted in deep green and different crop types are in distinct colours. Deer species are graphically represented as red deer (circles), fallow deer (triangles), and unknown deer (crosses). A colour gradient indicates observation time, from white (earlier) to dark red (latest). The magnitude of deer population observations is represented by the size of the respective symbols (circle, triangle, and cross), with larger symbols denoting larger populations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The population sizes of red deer observed across various vegetation types are depicted in the figure: “Grey dune” (illustrated by dark blue), “Decalcified fixed dune” (illustrated by light blue), “Unknown fields” (illustrated by dark green), “Grass field” (illustrated by light blue), “Corn field” (illustrated by yellow), and “Grain field” (illustrated by orange). <span class="html-italic">n</span> = number of populations and <span class="html-italic">i</span> = number of individuals.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Non-transformed, (<b>b</b>) log-transformed, and (<b>c</b>) arcsin-square-root-transformed proportion of time spent on the behaviour “Eating” in the different vegetation types: “Grey dune” (illustrated by dark blue), “Decalcified fixed dune” (illustrated by light blue), “Unknown fields” (illustrated by dark green), “Grass field” (illustrated by light blue), “Corn field” (illustrated by yellow), and “Grain field” (illustrated by orange). Significance level: * = <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05. <span class="html-italic">n</span> = number of populations and <span class="html-italic">i</span> = number of individuals.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Correlation plot displaying the correlation between the proportion of time spent on the behaviour “Eating” and the population size within the study area. The Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) is shown to quantify the strength and direction of the association between the variables.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Map showing the reported game yield of red deer (<span class="html-italic">Cervus elaphus</span>) for the 2022/2023 hunting season in Denmark. Thisted municipality is marked by a brown polygon, and a darker colour indicates a higher number of reported game yields. The map is from Aarhus University and has been modified [<a href="#B25-drones-08-00522" class="html-bibr">25</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>In the vicinity of Lyngby Hede, the observed species include red deer (illustrated with light grey), fallow deer (illustrated with darker grey), and unidentified deer (illustrated with dark grey), categorised into vegetation types denoted as (<b>a</b>) (fields), (<b>b</b>) (Grey dune), and (<b>c</b>) (Decalcified fixed dune).</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 16985 KiB  
Article
Farm Monitoring System with Drones and Optical Camera Communication
by Shinnosuke Kondo, Naoto Yoshimoto and Yu Nakayama
Sensors 2024, 24(18), 6146; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24186146 - 23 Sep 2024
Viewed by 903
Abstract
Drones have been attracting significant attention in the field of agriculture. They can be used for various tasks such as spraying pesticides, monitoring pests, and assessing crop growth. Sensors are also widely used in agriculture to monitor environmental parameters such as soil moisture [...] Read more.
Drones have been attracting significant attention in the field of agriculture. They can be used for various tasks such as spraying pesticides, monitoring pests, and assessing crop growth. Sensors are also widely used in agriculture to monitor environmental parameters such as soil moisture and temperature. Due to the high cost of communication infrastructure and radio-wave modules, the adoption of high-density sensing systems in agriculture is limited. To address this issue, we propose an agricultural sensor network system using drones and Optical Camera Communication (OCC). The idea is to transmit sensor data from LED panels mounted on sensor nodes and receive the data using a drone-mounted camera. This enables high-density sensing at low cost and can be deployed in areas with underdeveloped infrastructure and radio silence. We propose a trajectory control algorithm for the receiving drone to efficiently collect the sensor data. From computer simulations, we confirmed that the proposed algorithm reduces total flight time by 30% compared to a shortest-path algorithm. We also conducted a preliminary experiment at a leaf mustard farm in Kamitonda-cho, Wakayama, Japan, to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed system. We collected 5178 images of LED panels with a drone-mounted camera to train YOLOv5 for object detection. With simple On–Off Keying (OOK) modulation, we achieved sufficiently low bit error rates (BERs) under 103 in the real-world environment. The experimental results show that the proposed system is applicable for drone-based sensor data collection in agriculture. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Internet of Things)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Conceptual system architecture (Orange arrows: drone trajectory).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Block diagram of proposed system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Perspective transformation to image plane.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Ground coverage of drone-mounted camera (a: top length, b: bottom length, c: height of trapezoid).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Concept of trajectory control algorithm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Total trajectory length.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Total travel time.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Experimental setup.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Sensor node.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Sensor node taken from drone.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Sensor node placement (Red point: sensor node, Orange arrow: drone trajectory).</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Recognition accuracy of the LED panels.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Bit error rate with threshold of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> <mo>×</mo> <msup> <mn>10</mn> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>3</mn> </mrow> </msup> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">
31 pages, 73552 KiB  
Article
Enhancing 3D Rock Localization in Mining Environments Using Bird’s-Eye View Images from the Time-of-Flight Blaze 101 Camera
by John Kern, Reinier Rodriguez-Guillen, Claudio Urrea and Yainet Garcia-Garcia
Technologies 2024, 12(9), 162; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies12090162 - 12 Sep 2024
Viewed by 1609
Abstract
The mining industry faces significant challenges in production costs, environmental protection, and worker safety, necessitating the development of autonomous systems. This study presents the design and implementation of a robust rock centroid localization system for mining robotic applications, particularly rock-breaking hammers. The system [...] Read more.
The mining industry faces significant challenges in production costs, environmental protection, and worker safety, necessitating the development of autonomous systems. This study presents the design and implementation of a robust rock centroid localization system for mining robotic applications, particularly rock-breaking hammers. The system comprises three phases: assembly, data acquisition, and data processing. Environmental sensing was accomplished using a Basler Blaze 101 three-dimensional (3D) Time-of-Flight (ToF) camera. The data processing phase incorporated advanced algorithms, including Bird’s-Eye View (BEV) image conversion and You Only Look Once (YOLO) v8x-Seg instance segmentation. The system’s performance was evaluated using a comprehensive dataset of 627 point clouds, including samples from real mining environments. The system achieved efficient processing times of approximately 5 s. Segmentation accuracy was evaluated using the Intersection over Union (IoU), reaching 95.10%. Localization precision was measured by the Euclidean distance in the XY plane (EDXY), achieving 0.0128 m. The normalized error (enorm) on the X and Y axes did not exceed 2.3%. Additionally, the system demonstrated high reliability with R2 values close to 1 for the X and Y axes, and maintained performance under various lighting conditions and in the presence of suspended particles. The Mean Absolute Error (MAE) in the Z axis was 0.0333 m, addressing challenges in depth estimation. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the model’s robustness, revealing consistent performance across brightness and contrast variations, with an IoU ranging from 92.88% to 96.10%, while showing greater sensitivity to rotations. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Rock-breaker hammers.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>YOLO v8-Seg architecture [<a href="#B39-technologies-12-00162" class="html-bibr">39</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>System architecture.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Point clouds based on sensor placement. (<b>a</b>) Angle between sensors less than 30°. (<b>b</b>) Angle between sensors approximately between 120° and 190°.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Mineralogical and morphological characteristics. (<b>a</b>) “La Patagua” mine. (<b>b</b>) Rock fragment displaying fractures and calcite veinlets.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Created database. (<b>a</b>) Without overlap. (<b>b</b>) With overlap. (<b>c</b>) High lighting. (<b>d</b>) Suspended particles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Labeling distribution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Data augmentation. (<b>a</b>) Blur to 2 pixels. (<b>b</b>) Brightness to 15%. (<b>c</b>) Exposure to −5%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Centroid localization algorithm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Point cloud preprocessing.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Point cloud registration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>RANSAC.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>BEV images converted from point clouds.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Results from training the YOLO v8x-Seg model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Postprocessing. (<b>a</b>) Var 1. (<b>b</b>) Var 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>IoU metric results by image. (<b>a</b>) Without overlap. (<b>b</b>) With overlap.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p><math display="inline"><semantics> <msup> <mi>R</mi> <mn>2</mn> </msup> </semantics></math> metrics and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> <mi>x</mi> <mo>_</mo> <mi>e</mi> <mi>r</mi> <mi>r</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>r</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> without overlap. (<b>a</b>) N_S_N_O_V1. (<b>b</b>) N_S_N_O_V2. (<b>c</b>) S_N_O_V1. (<b>d</b>) S_N_O_V2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p><math display="inline"><semantics> <msup> <mi>R</mi> <mn>2</mn> </msup> </semantics></math> metrics and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> <mi>x</mi> <mo>_</mo> <mi>e</mi> <mi>r</mi> <mi>r</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>r</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> with overlap. (<b>a</b>) N_S_O_V1. (<b>b</b>) N_S_O_V2. (<b>c</b>) S_O_V1. (<b>d</b>) S_O_V2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Metrics used to assess the location of the rock centroid by image. (<b>a</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>M</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> without overlap. (<b>b</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>M</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> with overlap. (<b>c</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>e</mi> <mi>norm</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> without overlap. (<b>d</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>e</mi> <mi>norm</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> with overlap. (<b>e</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>E</mi> <msub> <mi>D</mi> <mi>XY</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> without overlap. (<b>f</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>E</mi> <msub> <mi>D</mi> <mi>XY</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> with overlap.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Examples of rock center localization in the image and centroid in the point cloud. Blue dots represent the ground truth, and red crosses represent the prediction. (<b>a</b>) Point cloud representation in the CloudCompare software. (<b>b</b>) Instance segmentation in a BEV image using YOLO v8x-Seg. (<b>c</b>) Localization in a BEV image. (<b>d</b>) Localization in the point cloud using the Open3D library.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 3639 KiB  
Article
Time-of-Flight Camera Intensity Image Reconstruction Based on an Untrained Convolutional Neural Network
by Tian-Long Wang, Lin Ao, Na Han, Fu Zheng, Yan-Qiu Wang and Zhi-Bin Sun
Photonics 2024, 11(9), 821; https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics11090821 - 30 Aug 2024
Viewed by 1100
Abstract
With the continuous development of science and technology, laser ranging technology will become more efficient, convenient, and widespread, and it has been widely used in the fields of medicine, engineering, video games, and three-dimensional imaging. A time-of-flight (ToF) camera is a three-dimensional stereo [...] Read more.
With the continuous development of science and technology, laser ranging technology will become more efficient, convenient, and widespread, and it has been widely used in the fields of medicine, engineering, video games, and three-dimensional imaging. A time-of-flight (ToF) camera is a three-dimensional stereo imaging device with the advantages of small size, small measurement error, and strong anti-interference ability. However, compared to traditional sensors, ToF cameras typically exhibit lower resolution and signal-to-noise ratio due to inevitable noise from multipath interference and mixed pixels during usage. Additionally, in environments with scattering media, the information about objects gets scattered multiple times, making it challenging for ToF cameras to obtain effective object information. To address these issues, we propose a solution that combines ToF cameras with single-pixel imaging theory. Leveraging intensity information acquired by ToF cameras, we apply various reconstruction algorithms to reconstruct the object’s image. Under undersampling conditions, our reconstruction approach yields higher peak signal-to-noise ratio compared to the raw camera image, significantly improving the quality of the target object’s image. Furthermore, when ToF cameras fail in environments with scattering media, our proposed approach successfully reconstructs the object’s image when the camera is imaging through the scattering medium. This experimental demonstration effectively reduces the noise and direct ambient light generated by the ToF camera itself, while opening up the potential application of ToF cameras in challenging environments, such as scattering media or underwater. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Flight time measurement in continuous sinusoidal wave modulation mode.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic diagram of the image reconstruction using a neural network. (<b>a</b>) Schematic diagram of network operation, (<b>b</b>) images reconstructed by the neural network with different sampling rates and different number of iterations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The schematic diagrams of SPI.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The schematic diagrams of SPI based on a ToF camera.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Experimental results of imaging reconstruction using intensity images at different SRs. (<b>a</b>) Target object, (<b>b</b>) ToF image, (<b>c</b>–<b>f</b>) the recovered images by CGI, BP, TVAL3, and DL. The SRs from left to right is 6.25%, 12.5%, 18.75%, 25%, 31.25% and 37.5%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Plots of the PSNRs of the reconstructed intensity images versus the SRs by different algorithms. The black, red, blue, and green lines denote the PSNRs by CGI, BP, TVAL3, and DL.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Experimental results of reconstruction using the intensity images through the scattering media at different SRs. (<b>a</b>) ToF image, (<b>b</b>–<b>e</b>) the recovered images by CGI, BP, TVAL3, and DL. The SRs from left to right are 6.25%, 12.5%, 18.75%, 25%, 31.25%, and 37.5%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Plots comparing the PSNR and SRs for the reconstruction of intensity images through scattering media using different algorithms.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Experimental results of reconstruction using the intensity images through the scattering media at different SRs. (<b>a</b>) ToF image, (<b>b</b>) ToF image with added Gaussian noise. (<b>c</b>–<b>f</b>) the recovered images by CGI, BP, TVAL3, and DL. The SRs from left to right are 6.25%, 12.5%, 18.75%, 25%, 31.25%, and 37.5%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Plots comparing the PSNR and SRs for the reconstruction of intensity images through scattering media using different algorithms.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 7587 KiB  
Article
Grape Maturity Estimation Using Time-of-Flight and LiDAR Depth Cameras
by Mathew Legg, Baden Parr, Genevieve Pascual and Fakhrul Alam
Sensors 2024, 24(16), 5109; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24165109 - 7 Aug 2024
Viewed by 578
Abstract
This article investigates the potential for using low-cost depth cameras to estimate the maturity of green table grapes after they have been harvested. Time-of-flight (Kinect Azure) and LiDAR (Intel L515) depth cameras were used to capture depth scans of green table grape berries [...] Read more.
This article investigates the potential for using low-cost depth cameras to estimate the maturity of green table grapes after they have been harvested. Time-of-flight (Kinect Azure) and LiDAR (Intel L515) depth cameras were used to capture depth scans of green table grape berries over time. The depth scans of the grapes are distorted due to the diffused scattering of the light emitted from the cameras within the berries. This causes a distance bias where a grape berry appears to be further from the camera than it is. As the grape aged, the shape of the peak corresponding to the grape became increasingly flattened in shape, resulting in an increased distance bias over time. The distance bias variation with time was able to be fitted with an R2 value of 0.969 for the Kinect Azure and an average of 0.904 for the Intel L515. This work shows that there is potential to use time-of-flight and LIDAR cameras for estimating grape maturity postharvest in a non-contact and nondestructive manner. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Robotics and Sensors Technology in Agriculture)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Diagram (<b>a</b>) and photo (<b>b</b>) of the experimental setup used for Kinect Azure scans of a grape berry over a number of days.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Cropped images of the grape captured by the Kinect Azure’s RGB (red, green, and blue) camera before (<b>a</b>) and after (<b>b</b>) being sprayed by the coating on Day 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Photos of the experimental setup used to capture depth scans of a single grape (<b>a</b>) and multiple grapes (<b>b</b>) using the Intel L515 depth camera.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Ruby and sapphire spheres used for comparison with grapes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Cropped images of the grape captured by the Kinect Azure’s RGB camera on (<b>a</b>) Days 1, (<b>b</b>) Days 3, (<b>c</b>) Day 5, (<b>d</b>) Day 7, (<b>e</b>) Day 9, and (<b>f</b>) Day 11.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Plot (<b>a</b>) shows Kinect Azure scans made of a grape on Day 1 and Day 12 after an opaque coating was sprayed onto the surface of the grape. Plot (<b>b</b>) shows the corresponding scans of the grape without any coating. Plots (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) show cross sections through the scans in the <span class="html-italic">X</span> and <span class="html-italic">Y</span> axes directions. Note that the <span class="html-italic">Z</span> axis is the depth or distance from the camera.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Kinect Azure depth scans of the grape berry captured on (<b>a</b>) Day 1, (<b>b</b>) Day 3, (<b>c</b>) Day 5, (<b>d</b>) Day 7, (<b>e</b>) Day 9, and (<b>f</b>) Day 11 without any spray coating. The red and cyan depth scan points show the cross sections in the <span class="html-italic">X</span> and <span class="html-italic">Y</span> axes directions that are plotted in <a href="#sensors-24-05109-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>c,d.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Plot shows the increasing depth error (distance bias) of the Kinect Azure time-of-flight depth scans of the grape over time. This is the error in the depth map for the peak corresponding to the grape relative to the actual distance (360 mm) between the grape and the camera.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Plots showing the L515 LiDAR scans of a grape located about 240 mm in front of the depth camera on (<b>a</b>) Day 1 and (<b>b</b>) Day 12 before and after being sprayed with an opaque coating.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Plot showing the 3D scans captured by the Intel L515 LiDAR of three grapes located (<b>a</b>) 240 mm and (<b>b</b>) 250 mm, respectively, from the depth camera on Days 1 and 12.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Plots showing the depth error (distance bias) of the Intel L515 LiDAR depth scans of grapes over time.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Plot showing the 3D scans captured by the Intel L515 LiDAR of the three grapes shown in <a href="#sensors-24-05109-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a>b. Plots (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) respectively correspond to the left, centre, and right grapes as viewed from the camera. For each grape, a scan is shown where the grape was sprayed with an opaque coating, as well as scans made on Days 1 and 8 without the coating.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Plots showing the distance bias measurements over time for the three grapes from two different bunches.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Measured percentage of weight loss of grapes with time. This should correlate with the percentage of water content loss.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Cropped Intel L515 depth scans of (<b>a</b>) ruby and (<b>b</b>) sapphire glass spheres before and after being sprayed with an opaque coating.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 4998 KiB  
Article
A YOLOv7-Based Method for Ship Detection in Videos of Drones
by Quanzheng Wang, Jingheng Wang, Xiaoyuan Wang, Luyao Wu, Kai Feng and Gang Wang
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2024, 12(7), 1180; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071180 - 14 Jul 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1083
Abstract
With the rapid development of the shipping industry, the number of ships is continuously increasing, and maritime accidents happen frequently. In recent years, computer vision and drone flight control technology have continuously developed, making drones widely used in related fields such as maritime [...] Read more.
With the rapid development of the shipping industry, the number of ships is continuously increasing, and maritime accidents happen frequently. In recent years, computer vision and drone flight control technology have continuously developed, making drones widely used in related fields such as maritime target detection. Compared to the cameras fixed on ships, a greater flexibility and a wider field of view is provided by cameras equipped on drones. However, there are still some challenges in high-altitude detection with drones. Firstly, from a top-down view, the shapes of ships are very different from ordinary views. Secondly, it is difficult to achieve faster detection speeds because of limited computing resources. To solve these problems, we propose YOLOv7-DyGSConv, a deep learning-based model for detecting ships in real-time videos captured by drones. The model is built on YOLOv7 with an attention mechanism, which enhances the ability to capture targets. Furthermore, the Conv in the Neck of the YOLOv7 model is replaced with the GSConv, which reduces the complexity of the model and improves the detection speed and detection accuracy. In addition, to compensate for the scarcity of ship datasets in top-down views, a ship detection dataset containing 2842 images taken by drones or with a top-down view is constructed in the research. We conducted experiments on our dataset, and the results showed that the proposed model reduced the parameters by 16.2%, the detection accuracy increased by 3.4%, and the detection speed increased by 13.3% compared with YOLOv7. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Management and Control of Ship Traffic Behaviours)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The framework of YOLOv7-DyGSConv.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>A schematic diagram of DyHead. (The ‘*’ indicates the addition of attention mechanisms corresponding to the image in different dimensions of the feature).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>A detailed design of DyHead.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The difference between SD (<b>a</b>) and DWConv (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The structure of GSConv.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The structures of the GS-Bottleneck (<b>a</b>) and VoV-GSCSP (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>A drone used to take pictures at high altitudes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Visualization of statistical results of our ship datasets. The number of ships is shown in (<b>a</b>); the position of the ship’s center in the picture is shown in (<b>b</b>); and the size of the ship in the picture is shown in (<b>c</b>). The darker the color at the midpoint (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>), the greater the quantity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Heat maps of stacking different numbers of DyHead blocks in YOLOv7.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Different positions chosen to implement GSConv in the Neck of YOLOv7.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Different positions chosen to implement GSConv in the Neck of YOLOv7. (<b>a</b>) YOLOv7-DyGSConv structure diagram; (<b>b</b>) YOLOv7 structure diagram.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The visualization of ship detection from YOLOv7-DyGSConv.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop