Abstract
Improper operating parameters in maize ear harvesters can cause physical damage to the ears, resulting in grain loss. To address the lack of real-time decision-making support for correcting improper operating parameters in maize ear harvesters, we designed a Fused Inverted Bottleneck and Attention mechanism combined U-Net model (FIBA U-Net) for real-time detection of maize ear damage. The encoder of FIBA U-Net replaces the first eight blocks of EfficientNet-B3 with Fused-MBConv, which enhances the model's feature extraction capability and significantly improves detection accuracy. The CBAM module is applied to the first two skip connections in the decoder of FIBA U-Net, effectively enhancing features in maize ear damage regions while suppressing irrelevant information such as lighting variations and background noise. We compare the performance of FIBA U-Net with Eff U-Net, ResNeSt50, ConvNeXt, and ViT in segmenting the complex boundary regions of ear stacking within the maize ear collection chamber. FIBA U-Net achieves the best performance across all evaluation metrics. The method achieved an overall accuracy of up to 98.61% in field tests. The damage detection rates for the bottom of the grain collection box differed from the actual damage rates by only 0.31% under partial coverage and 0.42% under full coverage, respectively. Experimental results demonstrate that the model significantly improves accuracy, making it suitable for deployment in the complex operating environment of maize ear harvesters. It provides valuable support for parameter optimisation of harvesting machinery and maize ear grading, and demonstrates strong potential for practical application and large-scale deployment. • Novel high-precision approach for maize ear harvest damage detection. • Real-time ear damage detection via TensorRT and INT8 Optimisation. • Fused-MBConv combined with CBAM enhances complex area detection. • The method sustains high performance even under varying light intensity.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
FIBA U-Net achieved the best performance across all evaluation metrics when compared with Eff U-Net, ResNeSt50, ConvNeXt and ViT for segmenting maize ear damage.
- Outcome
- performance across all evaluation metricse1
- Direction
- beste1
- Comparator
- Eff U-Net, ResNeSt50, ConvNeXt, and ViTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
t0“maize ear harvesters”
e0“We compare the performance of FIBA U-Net with Eff U-Net, ResNeSt50, ConvNeXt, and ViT”
e1“FIBA U-Net achieves the best performance across all evaluation metrics”
Claim · model-written summary
The method reached an overall accuracy of up to 98.61% in field tests.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
t0“maize ear harvesters”
e0“The method achieved an overall accuracy of up to 98.61% in field tests”
Claim · model-written summary
Damage detection rates at the bottom of the grain collection box differed from actual damage rates by only 0.31% under partial coverage.
- Outcome
- damage detection ratese0
- Value
- 0.31%e0
- Qualifier
- under partial coveragee0
- Comparator
- actual damage ratese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
t0“maize ear harvesters”
e0“The damage detection rates for the bottom of the grain collection box differed from the actual damage rates by only 0.31% under partial coverage and 0.42% under full coverage”
Claim · model-written summary
Damage detection rates at the bottom of the grain collection box differed from actual damage rates by only 0.42% under full coverage.
- Outcome
- damage detection ratese0
- Value
- 0.42%e0
- Qualifier
- under full coveragee0
- Comparator
- actual damage ratese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
t0“maize ear harvesters”
e0“The damage detection rates for the bottom of the grain collection box differed from the actual damage rates by only 0.31% under partial coverage and 0.42% under full coverage”