PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 10, 2026Computational Intelligence0 citations

Advanced Machine Learning Techniques for Pest Classification: A Comprehensive Review

View Full Paper
CHC. N. HettiarachchiRMR. G. N. Meegama

Key Points

  • The aim is to review advanced machine learning techniques for pest classification, focusing on accuracy and methodologies.
  • Systematic examination of deep learning approaches for pest classification
  • Assessment of Convolutional Neural Networks, Transformer models, ensemble methods, and Graph Neural Networks
  • Evaluation of benchmark datasets and model architectures
  • Transformer models achieved up to 99.52% accuracy and a 90.9% F1-score on the IP102 dataset
  • Vision Transformer model reached 96.7% accuracy on PlantVillage
  • Ensemble models, like GAEnsemble, scored 98.81% and 95.16% on D0 and SCD datasets respectively
  • CNNs performed lower on the IP102 dataset
  • GNNs showed poor performance, below 60% accuracy

Abstract

ABSTRACT The protection of crops from pests is essential for sustainable agriculture and global food security. Traditional pest identification techniques that are based on visual examination are time‐consuming and prone to errors. Recent developments in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and specifically deep learning (DL) enabled pests to be detected accurately and automatically. This review systematically examines DL‐based approaches, including Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), Transformer models, ensemble methods, and Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), for pest classification, with an emphasis on benchmark datasets, model architectures, and evaluation metrics. Transformer models, such as GNViT, achieved 99.52% accuracy and a 90.9% F1‐score on the IP102 dataset, which is approximately 10% higher than the CNNs. The Vision Transformer (ViT) model achieved 96.7% accuracy on PlantVillage. The ensemble model, like GAEnsemble, achieved excellent accuracies of 98.81% and 95.16% on D0 and SCD, respectively. CNN models had relatively lower performance on the IP102, and the GNNs showed poor performance (below 60%). This paper discusses prospective methodological enhancements, current limitations, and future prospects for developing scalable, understandable, and multi‐domain pest classification systems.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hettiarachchi et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d896566c1944d70ce07bcchttps://doi.org/10.1111/coin.70229
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1GNViT- An enhanced image-based groundnut pest classification using Vision Transformer (ViT) model2024 · 14 citations
  2. 2A pest image recognition method for long-tail distribution problem2024 · 5 citations
  3. 3Citrus Pest Identification Model Based on Improved ShuffleNet2024 · 13 citations
  4. 4The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews2021 · 104,334 citations
  5. 5Image-based Pest Identification Using Support Vector Machine for Agricultural Crop Protection2025 · 3 citations