説明可能な植物病害診断のための知覚専門家とマルチモーダル大規模言語モデルの融合：ベンチマーク画像から実世界ロボットフィールド検証まで
Fusing Perceptual Vision Experts with Multimodal Large Language Models for Explainable Plant Disease Diagnosis: From Benchmark Imagery to Real-World Robotic Field Validation
植物病害診断の精度向上のため、CNNモデルと大規模言語モデルを組み合わせたハイブリッド階層マルチエージェントフレームワークを提案し、ベンチマークとロボット取得画像で検証した。
詳しい要約
1. どんなもの？
2. 先行研究と比べてどこがすごい？
3. 技術・手法の肝は？
4. どうやって有効だと検証した？
5. 議論はある？
6. 次に読むべき論文は？
※ AIが要旨から生成した要約です。正確性は原文をご確認ください。
著者: Ranjan Sapkota, Konstantinos I. Roumeliotis, Pengyao Xie, Nikolaos D. Tselikas, Lirong Xiang, Manoj Karkee
分類: cs.CV, cs.AI
原文アブストラクト
Accurate field plant disease diagnosis requires reliable fusion of uncertain and conflicting perceptual evidence. We present the Hybrid Hierarchical Multi-Agent Framework (H$^{2}$MAF), combining decision-level fusion of EfficientNet-B3 and ConvNeXt-Tiny with semantic arbitration by open-weight multimodal large language models (MLLMs), Gemma 4 E4B and Qwen3.5 4B, using structured JSON evidence to generate explainable diagnoses, risk levels, treatment urgency, and financial exposure. (H$^{2}$MAF) is evaluated on 14,364 images (1,370 test images) across PlantDoc (2,922 images, 27 classes) and two non-public, continuously captured Cornell robot-acquired field datasets: Stage 2 (20 GB; 4,215 images) and Stage 4 (40 GB; 7,227 images), covering Early Blight, Late Blight, and Septoria Leaf Spot under uncontrolled field conditions. On PlantDoc, Gemma improves accuracy from 63.9% to 68.5%, achieving +7.6 points on the 41.7% CNN-conflict subset. Cornell accuracies reach 99.3% and 98.9%, with only 1.7-4.1% disagreement, demonstrating conflict-dependent MLLM utility. The critical-risk error of gemma is 0.14-0.5 points, whereas Qwen overflags by 3.5-14.4 points. These results establish MLLM arbitration as a promising, yet calibration-dependent, approach for explainable agricultural AI and robotic field decision support. Github Link: https://github.com/Applied-AI-Research-Lab/Explainable-AI-Plant-Disease-Detection