Paper · 2025 · Ecological Informatics

Multiscale feature fusion and enhancement in a transformer for the fine-grained visual classification of tree species

Yanqi Dong; Zhibin Ma; Jiali Zi; et al.

6
claims
6
verbatim quotes
4
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Accurate and rapid fine-grained visual classification (FGVC) of tree species within the same family can provide technical support for tree surveys, research, and conservation. However, FGVC faces challenges such as large intraclass differences and small interclass differences. Recognizing tree species within the same family requires focusing on and correlating overall and multiorgan features of the trees while mitigating the influence of complex natural backgrounds, occlusion effects and other factors. To address these challenges, we propose multiscale feature fusion (MFF) and enhancement in transformers to improve recognition performance. The method consists of a Swin transformer backbone , an MFF module, a discriminative feature enhancement (DFE) module, and a texture feature enhancement (TFE) module. The MFF module aims to strike a balance between global and local feature extraction. The DFE module is employed to mitigate the impact of background noise, whereas the TFE module is used to enhance the feature extraction associated with complex textures and spatial patterns. We conducted experiments on a constructed dataset of tree species from the same family, achieving a top-1 accuracy of 90.3 % and a top-3 accuracy of 96.8 %. In addition, the method performed well on three popular FGVC datasets, namely, the Flavia , Oxford Flowers, and PlantCLEF 2015 datasets, with top-1 accuracies of 100 %, 99.2 %, and 81.4 %, respectively. The ablation experiments and module visualizations also yielded satisfactory results. Thus, this work provides a solution to enhance the FGVC task.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 6

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The transformer attained 90.3% top-1 accuracy on a same-family tree species dataset.

Taxon
tree speciese0
Outcome
top-1 accuracye0
Value
90.3 %e0
Setting
constructed dataset of tree species from the same familye0

Verbatim

e0

“We conducted experiments on a constructed dataset of tree species from the same family, achieving a top-1 accuracy of 90.3 % and a top-3 accuracy of 96.8 %.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1091–1247 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The transformer attained 96.8% top-3 accuracy on a same-family tree species dataset.

Taxon
tree speciese0
Outcome
top-3 accuracye0
Value
96.8 %e0
Setting
constructed dataset of tree species from the same familye0

Verbatim

e0

“We conducted experiments on a constructed dataset of tree species from the same family, achieving a top-1 accuracy of 90.3 % and a top-3 accuracy of 96.8 %.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1091–1247 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The method attained 100% top-1 accuracy on the Flavia dataset.

Outcome
top-1 accuraciese0
Value
100 %e0
Setting
Flaviae0

Verbatim

e0

“the method performed well on three popular FGVC datasets, namely, the Flavia , Oxford Flowers, and PlantCLEF 2015 datasets, with top-1 accuracies of 100 %, 99.2 %, and 81.4 %, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1261–1450 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The method attained 99.2% top-1 accuracy on the Oxford Flowers dataset.

Outcome
top-1 accuraciese0
Value
99.2 %e0
Setting
Oxford Flowerse0

Verbatim

e0

“the method performed well on three popular FGVC datasets, namely, the Flavia , Oxford Flowers, and PlantCLEF 2015 datasets, with top-1 accuracies of 100 %, 99.2 %, and 81.4 %, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1261–1450 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The method attained 81.4% top-1 accuracy on the PlantCLEF 2015 dataset.

Outcome
top-1 accuraciese0
Value
81.4 %e0
Setting
PlantCLEF 2015e0

Verbatim

e0

“the method performed well on three popular FGVC datasets, namely, the Flavia , Oxford Flowers, and PlantCLEF 2015 datasets, with top-1 accuracies of 100 %, 99.2 %, and 81.4 %, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1261–1450 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ablation experiments and module visualizations gave satisfactory results.

Outcome
satisfactory resultse0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The ablation experiments and module visualizations also yielded satisfactory results.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1451–1536 · show in text ↑