Search

Detecting changes in soil micro-relief in farmland helps to understand degradation processes like sheet erosion. Using the high-resolution technique of terrestrial laser scanning (TLS), we generated point clouds of three 2 × 3 m plots on a weekly basis from May to mid-June in 2022 on cultivated farmland in Germany. Three well-known applications for eliminating vegetation points in the generated point cloud were tested: Cloth Simulation Filter (CSF) as a filtering method, three variants of CANUPO as a machine learning method, and ArcGIS PointCNN as a deep learning method, a sub-category of machine learning using deep neural networks. We assessed the methods with hard criteria such as F1 score, balanced accuracy, height differences, and their standard deviations to the reference surface, resulting in data gaps and robustness, and with soft criteria such as time-saving capacity, accessibility, and user knowledge. All algorithms showed a low performance at the initial measurement epoch, increasing with later epochs. While most of the results demonstrate a better performance of ArcGIS PointCNN, this algorithm revealed an exceptionally low performance in plot 1, which is describable by the generalization gap. Although CANUPO variants created the highest amount of data gaps, we recommend that CANUPO include colour values in combination with CSF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Several recent publications have demonstrated the use of convolutional neural networks to classify images of melanoma at par with board-certified dermatologists. However, the non-availability of a public human benchmark restricts the comparability of the performance of these algorithms and thereby the technical progress in this field. Methods An electronic questionnaire was sent to dermatologists at 12 German university hospitals. Each questionnaire comprised 100 dermoscopic and 100 clinical images (80 nevi images and 20 biopsy-verified melanoma images, each), all open-source. The questionnaire recorded factors such as the years of experience in dermatology, performed skin checks, age, sex and the rank within the university hospital or the status as resident physician. For each image, the dermatologists were asked to provide a management decision (treat/biopsy lesion or reassure the patient). Main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity and the receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Results Total 157 dermatologists assessed all 100 dermoscopic images with an overall sensitivity of 74.1%, specificity of 60.0% and an ROC of 0.67 (range = 0.538–0.769); 145 dermatologists assessed all 100 clinical images with an overall sensitivity of 89.4%, specificity of 64.4% and an ROC of 0.769 (range = 0.613–0.9). Results between test-sets were significantly different (P < 0.05) confirming the need for a standardised benchmark. Conclusions We present the first public melanoma classification benchmark for both non-dermoscopic and dermoscopic images for comparing artificial intelligence algorithms with diagnostic performance of 145 or 157 dermatologists. Melanoma Classification Benchmark should be considered as a reference standard for white-skinned Western populations in the field of binary algorithmic melanoma classification. Highlights • This paper provides the first open access melanoma classification benchmark for both non-dermoscopic and dermoscopic images. • Algorithms can now be easily compared to the performance of dermatologists in terms of sensitivity, specificity and ROC. • The melanoma benchmark allows comparability between algorithms of different publications and provides a new reference standard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]