21–30 of 103 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or Google Lens? I've only tried Lens on various office plants (so not in the wild) but it was very effective for those
Or seek! https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/seek_app
https://plantnet.org/en/
It does fail sometimes but it's pretty good, and the UI has improved in recent releases.
Nice concept. Unfortunately, I have tried to identify some of my plants but it could not identify correctly a single one. Just an endless procession of at best similar plants, most of the time completely dissimilar. I think this is another naive model that just tries to push entire problem to AI. That is unfortunately what I am seeing nowadays, very unimaginative. Just try to have fun with parameters of the network u…
IMO this will just lead people to wrongly ID their plants more often than not, and that's a really bad thing.
I have an app on my iPhone that works pretty well (PictureThis). Probably does about the same thing as this. I noticed that the following clause in their Ts & Cs: > You grant us an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide and royalty-free right and license to use your Content for the purposes of providing, promoting, developing and trying to improve the Candide Platform and our other services, including new services that we…
Candide is very well set up to protect users' private data, and has a great set of engineers and engineering practices in place ensuring this, as well as, you know, not ever selling data to a third party!
I made some classifiers using coreML to test the idea and as with a lot of ML problems, 90% accuracy is trivial, but it gets difficult really quickly after that. Especially without flowers (since they tend to be more unique).
The simplest way I could find to add detection was to use something like the plantnet API (https://my.plantnet.org/usage) which powers the app of a similar name. There are a couple of other plant recognition APIs worth looking at too.
Nice concept. Unfortunately, I have tried to identify some of my plants but it could not identify correctly a single one. Just an endless procession of at best similar plants, most of the time completely dissimilar. I think this is another naive model that just tries to push entire problem to AI. That is unfortunately what I am seeing nowadays, very unimaginative. Just try to have fun with parameters of the network u…
There's no reason to think that needs to be done separately, and in fact that's the kind of things that you'd expect a good model to find on its own.
In general, we've already learned that while handcrafted features can help, they are often ultimately worse than learned ones as techniques get better.
Nice concept. Unfortunately, I have tried to identify some of my plants but it could not identify correctly a single one. Just an endless procession of at best similar plants, most of the time completely dissimilar. I think this is another naive model that just tries to push entire problem to AI. That is unfortunately what I am seeing nowadays, very unimaginative. Just try to have fun with parameters of the network u…
>What it would benefit from would be some kind of analysis/classification of basic features of the plants like what's the basic shape of the leaf, trunk, how things are connected, etc. There's no reason to think that needs to be done separately, and in fact that's the kind of things that you'd expect a good model to find on its own. In general, we've already learned that while handcrafted features can help, they are…
Every plant has baked in restrictions on how it grows. If you can identify separate features of a leaf and how the leaf grows out of the stem you can basically look it up in a table and tell what kind of tree you are looking at, without need for guessing.
On the other hand AI will develop its own classification method but one that has unknown faults in it.
Maybe it has learned to look at the lighting direction because half of the data set was non-suculents with light from the left and half was succulents with light from the right, because it came from a different facility?
Or maybe different cameras were used to photograph different types of plants?
So now rather than looking at the leaves it uses light direction or photo grain to tell if it is succulent or not?
Face the reality, you are wrong.
The above algorithm returns completely nonsensical results for my searches, plants that have completely different structure and coloration and nobody would ever mistake them.
It relies at you looking at the suggested solution, and then, Hey!, here you have five more, maybe your plant is somewhere on the list?
This is only marginally useful but could have been so much better if it tried to identify structure of the plant.
Nice concept. Unfortunately, I have tried to identify some of my plants but it could not identify correctly a single one. Just an endless procession of at best similar plants, most of the time completely dissimilar. I think this is another naive model that just tries to push entire problem to AI. That is unfortunately what I am seeing nowadays, very unimaginative. Just try to have fun with parameters of the network u…
Right. This kind of thing is only going to work on very common plants that are easy to ID. I am very into carnivorous plants and even us experts sometimes have trouble identifying plants, often you need very specific morphological details to ID species that a phone picture will never be able to catch. IMO this will just lead people to wrongly ID their plants more often than not, and that's a really bad thing.
You label geotagged images with the AIs suggestion if you agree with it and then other users can either confirm or suggest a different / more specific species.