## 6.6 Further research

Today, deep learning may be the only competitive alternative that could improve the results of each feature type. Following the approach that has been undertaken in a previous article [Vayssade et al., 2021], an alternative based on function approximators is possible. We could then define the best shape properties from a fixed representation of the contour. The same is true for texture and spatial properties. In reality, a UNet model already synthesizes the set of texture, color, spectrum and a kind of shape features if used in this crop/weed discrimination framework. Moreover, the performance of the extraction of these features does not allow a real time use, which reinforces the need to study deep learning.

In this study, feature selection is only based on classification performances of features. Computation speed is neither estimated nor taken into account. However, depending on the application, a compromise between computation speed and classification performance could be used. The selection of the best features for real-time weed detection and elimination is of particular interest. Figure 6.6 shows that the major classification improvement comes from the 10 first features (from 71 to 90%), the next 10 features improve the classification result of a bit more than 1%. This observation shows that a study focused on performance over computing time should be relevant. This is also a key step in developing on-board weed control systems in autonomous vehicles where computing power can be restricted and time matters the most.

Considering precision farming applications, this approach could be replicated to select the best features for a specific set of crop(s) and weeds. The objective could change from an application to another and should be linked to the classification accuracy requirements and the time available. A real-time application may focus on computing time with less consideration for classification performance. A UAV approach may allow more computing time as the result is already delayed from the acquisition. In both case, the image resolution may be an important setting : too high and the computing time may be too important, too low and the classification performance may drop too much. This resolution may also impact the feature contribution to the overall classification with spectral or shape feature requiring highest resolution than spatial features.
Supplementary materials

<table><caption>**Table 6.8** – Number of features after hyperparameter optimization (FV) and number of hyperparameters (HP) per feature extraction methods</caption><thead><tr><th>Type</th><th>Name</th><th>FV</th><th>HP</th><th>Type</th><th>Name</th><th>FV</th><th>HP</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Spatial</td><td>Borner</td><td>1</td><td>4</td><td>Spectral</td><td>Sig</td><td>16</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Spatial</td><td>Row</td><td>1</td><td>6</td><td>Spectral</td><td>Stats</td><td>72</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Spatial</td><td>Blob</td><td>1</td><td>4</td><td>Spectral</td><td>polyfit</td><td>58</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>type</td><td>name</td><td>FV</td><td>HP</td><td>Spectral</td><td>DoG</td><td>72</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>Angles</td><td>9</td><td>5</td><td>Spectral</td><td>HOG</td><td>72</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>Ellipse</td><td>11</td><td>-</td><td>Spectral</td><td>Gabor</td><td>288</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>Fragstat</td><td>6</td><td>-</td><td>Spectral</td><td>Haralick</td><td>416</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>metrics</td><td>8</td><td>-</td><td>Spectral</td><td>GLCM</td><td>80</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>Solidity</td><td>1</td><td>-</td><td>Spectral</td><td>Hu Moment</td><td>56</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>Particle</td><td>18</td><td>-</td><td>Spectral</td><td>Zernike</td><td>32</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>Hu Moment</td><td>7</td><td>-</td><td>Spectral</td><td>LBP</td><td>2056</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>Skeletonize</td><td>4</td><td>-</td><td>Spectral</td><td>CSLBP</td><td>144</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Spectral</td><td>OCLBP</td><td>34</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Spectral</td><td>Shi-Tomasi</td><td>8</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>**Table 6.9** – Top features for each shape types</caption><tr><td>Shape Angles</td><td>bins_8, bins_12, bins_13, bins_14, bins_15, bins_16, bins_17, bins_18, bins_19, bins_20</td></tr><tr><td>Shape Ellipse</td><td>center-distance, minor-axis, angle, eccentricity_1, eccentricity_2, eccentricity_3, eccentricity_angle, focal-distance, directrice, det</td></tr><tr><td>Shape Fragstats</td><td>perimeter-area-ratio, shape-index, fractal-dimension_index, linearity-index, related-circumscribing-circle, perimeter-area-fractal-dimension</td></tr><tr><td>Shape Hu-Moment</td><td>0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6</td></tr><tr><td>Shape Metrics</td><td>proximity, spin, area-exchange, perim-index, depth, dispersion, girth, detour</td></tr><tr><td>Shape Particle</td><td>inv-area, inv-perimeter, m2, m3, m4, m6, m8, aspect-ratio, roundness, convexity</td></tr><tr><td>Shape Skeletonize</td><td>pixel-count, end-point, intersection, branch-count</td></tr></table>
<table><caption>Table 6.10 – Top 10 for each spectral types</caption><tr><td>Spectral CSLBP</td><td>bins_0_21, bins_1_10, bins_1_18, bins_1_19, bins_1_20, bins_1_21, bins_2_10, bins_2_18, bins_2_20, bins_4_21</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral DoG</td><td>0_median, 2_min, 2_median, 3_max, 3_median, 3_entropy, 4_max, 5_max, 5_mean, std_max</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral Gabor</td><td>0_0_median, 1_0_mean, 2_0_max, 2_0_mean, 3_0_min, 3_158_entropy, 4_0_min, 5_0_min, std_158_mean, ndvi_0_min</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral HOG</td><td>0_bins_70, 1_bins_70, 1_bins_130, 2_bins_70, 3_bins_30, 5_bins_110, std_bins_30, std_bins_70, std_bins_150, ndvi_bins_150</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral GLCM</td><td>0_ASM_00, 1contrast_90, 3_correlation_90, 3_ASM_90, 4contrast_90, 4_homeogeneity_00, 5contrast_90, stdcontrast_90, std_correlation_90, ndvi_homeogeneity_90</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral Haralick</td><td>1_17, 1_31, 2_24, 2_31, 3_32, 4_32, 5_3, 5_51, std_29, std_44</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral Hu-Moment</td><td>0_0, 1_1, 2_1, 3_0, 3_2, 4_0, 5_0, 5_4, std_3, ndvi_3</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral LBP</td><td>bins_0_64, bins_0_209, bins_1_129, bins_2_129, bins_2_209, bins_3_129, bins_4_209, bins_4_250, bins_5_129, bins_std_129</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral OCLBP</td><td>bins_0, bins_1, bins_2, bins_3, bins_4, bins_9, bins_20, bins_26, bins_32, bins_33</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral Polyfit</td><td>1_2, 1_6, 2_6, 3_1, 3_6, 4_4, 5_3, 5_4, std_5, ndvi_0</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral Shi-tomasi</td><td>bins_0, bins_1, bins_2, bins_3, bins_4, bins_6, bins_7, bins_9, bins_11, bins_13</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral Signature</td><td>shape_0, shape_1, shape_2, shape_3, shape_4, shape_5, shape_ndvi, window_0, window_std, window_ndvi</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral Stats</td><td>0_min, 1_std, 2_min, 2_median, 3_max, 3_median, 4_std, 4_entropy, 5_max, ndvi_max</td></tr><tr><td>Spectral Zernike</td><td>0_A, 1_Zr, 1_A, 2_Zr, 3_A, 4_A, 5_A, std_A, std_Phi, ndvi_A</td></tr></table>

## Funds & Conflicts of Interest

Funding was received from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 727321 (project acronym, IWMPRAISE). It was also funded by the French National Research Agency Challenge RoSE [grant agreement ID : ANR-17-ROSE-0002] (project acronym : ROSEAU). In addition, a collaboration with SITIA company is existing. The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper
### 6.7 Conclusion de chapitre

L'un des buts de cette thèse était de définir les meilleures propriétés pour la discrimination culture/adventices. Comme il n'existe pas d'études les définissant clairement (souvent, un petit ensemble de propriétés, dans des conditions spécifiques, est utilisé.), nous avons mené nos propres recherches pour identifier les méthodes les plus prometteuses. De plus, une échelle de segmentation plus fine que celle de la plante a été définie, celle de la feuille. Ce faisant, nous espérons fournir une compréhension plus détaillée de la manière dont ces propriétés peuvent être utilisées à des fins de classification cultures/adventices.

Pour combler cette lacune, nous avons recensé les méthodes existantes et identifiées les propriétés les plus prometteuses pour la discrimination cultures/adventices à l'échelle de la feuille. On y distingue les propriétés spatiales, reposant sur des notions de distances à l'échelle de l'image, et les propriétés de forme permettant de caractériser les traits morphologiques des individus. Des propriétés de texture, de couleur et de spectre ont également été proposées pour extraire des informations liées à la composition et aux structures internes des feuilles (veines, épiderme, ...).

À partir de ce recensement, nous avons vu que certaines méthodes permettant d'extraire des propriétés comportaient des paramètres. Ces paramètres influencent le potentiel de discrimination des propriétés extraites. C'est pourquoi un algorithme a été proposé pour optimiser ces paramètres avant l'extraction et l'exploitation des propriétés concernées. Il a été montré que l'optimisation de ces hyperparamètres jouait un rôle crucial. Par exemple, les propriétés du type ShapeAngles passent de 50 % à 62.81 % de potentiel de discrimination après optimisation, de même que les propriétés SpectralDoG passent de 46.75 % à 72.39 %, etc.

Après cette phase d'optimisation, toutes les propriétés ont été extraites à partir du jeu de données pour évaluation. Au cours de cette évaluation, il a été montré l'importance de la sélection d'un ensemble plus petit de propriétés. Les 10 meilleures ont été sélectionnées pour chaque type de propriété, puis les 20 meilleures parmi toutes les propriétés combinées. Les résultats montrent une performance de discrimination culture/adventices à hauteur de 91 % avec 20 propriétés, tandis qu'une performance de 79.97 % est observée en utilisant l'ensemble des 3545 propriétés. En effet, les techniques de classification usuelles ne semblent pas être capables de gérer de grands ensembles de propriétés. Par conséquent, il est important de définir un ensemble minimal de critères qui permette de diminuer le temps de calcul tout en maximisant les performances de classification.

En conclusion, une étude a été réalisée pour déterminer quelles propriétés sont les plus importantes pour la tâche de discrimination cultures/adventices, puis elles ont été optimisées pour obtenir les meilleurs résultats. Un algorithme a été utilisé pour trouver la meilleure façon d'utiliser ces propriétés pour la classification. Au final, il a été constaté que l'utilisation d'un ensemble plus restreint de propriétés, de différents types, donne les meilleurs résultats.
# 7 Conclusion Générale

Les travaux de recherche de cette thèse ont été entrepris dans le cadre du projet européen *H2020 IWMPRAISE*, dans le but de proposer des outils pour une meilleure gestion des adventices avec pour principal objectif de diminuer l'utilisation des produits phytosanitaires et leurs impacts écologiques (présentés dans l'introduction). Cette thèse, s'est aussi insérée dans l'*ANR Challenge RoSE*, dont l'objectif était de mobiliser et d'évaluer les performances de différentes équipes de recherche, pour le désherbage de l'intra-rang en grandes cultures et cultures légumières de plein champ.

Les recherches qui ont été effectuées et présentées dans ce manuscrit, concernent la tâche de détection des adventices, qui constitue encore aujourd'hui un verrou scientifique. Pour répondre aux autres tâches évaluées dans le cadre de l'*ANR Challenge RoSE* (telles que l'interprétation, la décision et l'action), un partenariat avec la société *SITIA*, les chambres d'Agriculture de Bretagne et Pays de Loire, et l'*IRSEEM-ESIGELEC* a été établi en amont de cette thèse. L'ensemble constitue le consortium *ROSEAU*. Ainsi, les résultats de ces recherches ont voca-
tion à être implémentés sur le robot « TREKTOR », de la société *SITIA*, pour une gestion automatisée des adventices.

L'objectif principal de cette thèse était de définir les "meilleurs" critères extractibles à par-
tir d'images multispectrales, afin de discriminer les cultures des adventices. Toutefois, il est
rapidement apparu que l'extraction et l'évaluation de critères ne présentaient pas de verrou
scientifique majeur, mais que la performance et la stabilité des critères de discrimination dé-
pendait de la segmentation des images. Ainsi, le travail s'est orienté vers la définition d'indices
de végétation optimaux et d'une méthode de segmentation sémantique des instances à l'échelle
de la feuille. La performance des méthodes proposées a été évaluée sur des images de feuillage
dense, acquises en lumière naturelle. Au final, l'approche proposée mixe classification usuelle
et apprentissage profond.
### 7.1 Contributions

Comme évoqué dans le chapitre 2, il existe deux grandes voies pour détecter les adventices : une approche standard d'analyse d'image ou l'utilisation du "tout" deep-learning. Notre méthode repose sur une architecture "standard" dont chaque partie a été améliorée par optimisation des hyperparamètres ou par apprentissage profond. La figure 7.1 ci-dessous, montre l'architecture finale qui a été développée ici.

<figure><img src="image_154.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 7.1** – Pipeline final pour la détection et la discrimination des adventices</figcaption></figure>

La première étape du pipeline est le "Pre-Processing" des données, pour l'exploitation des images multispectrales acquises durant nos expérimentations. Elle consiste en la calibration de la caméra et l'utilisation d'un algorithme développé, permettant la superposition des bandes spectrales avec une erreur inférieure au pixel.

La seconde étape, "Deep-Indices", vise à discriminer la végétation du sol. Cela consiste en l'utilisation de nouveaux indices déduis par apprentissage supervisé sur des approximateurs de fonction. Ces derniers, contrairement aux indices standards, ont l'avantage de ne pas dépendre d'une correction radiométrique. Ces Deep-Indices ont montré une nette amélioration de la qualité de la segmentation (82.19 mIoU) par rapport aux indices standards (63.98–73.71 mIoU).

La troisième étape, "Deep-Leaves", permet d'identifier les feuilles. Un algorithme a été développé et utilise les Deep-Indices ainsi qu'un CNN qui détecte le contour des feuilles. Cette approche a montré de bonnes performances sur des jeux de données externes et sur nos données acquises en condition de terrain. Cette méthode permet de travailler avec n'importe quelle densité de feuillage et a la capacité de détecter les plus petites adventices même lors de leur émergence.

Enfin, on réalise l'extraction des meilleures caractéristiques pour la discrimination des cultures et des adventices. Pour ce faire, on a recensé plusieurs méthodes permettant l'extraction de différents types de caractéristiques. On utilise ensuite un algorithme d'optimisation des hyperparamètres pour chacune d'elles afin de maximiser leurs performances dans notre cas d'utilisation. On termine en utilisant un algorithme de sélection de propriétés qui permet de déterminer les meilleures combinaisons des propriétés extraites.

Une performance de classification de 91 % a été démontrée. Nous rappelons que notre étude est à l'échelle de la feuille, ce qui est une première dans ce domaine, ainsi qu'en condition terrain. Il n'existe donc pas de points de comparaison dans la littérature. On peut cependant noter qu'à l'échelle de la plante dans différentes conditions d'acquisition, l'état de l'art [Ahmed et al., 2016] donne des performances entre 77 % et 97 % de discrimination culture/adventices par de tels critères. Ce qui place favorablement nos résultats et offre ainsi des perspectives.
### 7.2 Perspectives

**Acquisition** Concernant la caméra, de par sa conception multi-capteurs, une méthode de recapture des bandes spectrales est nécessaire. Même si un algorithme a été développé durant cette thèse et même s'il montre d'excellentes performances pour corriger ce problème, la méthode est coûteuse en temps de calcul et il n'existe actuellement pas de solution plus performante pour cet appareil. Ainsi, bien que cette caméra offre une résolution spatiale de très bonne qualité, son utilisation ne permet pas un traitement des données en temps réel. D'autres caméras multispectrales et hyperspectrales ont vu le jour durant cette thèse, et pourraient améliorer les performances (temps de calcul ou précision). De plus, aucune correction radiométrique n'a été utilisée durant cette thèse, principalement du fait des contraintes expérimentales. Les résultats de cette thèse montrent d'excellentes performances sans cette correction radiométrique, mais l'on peut supposer qu'un tel pré-traitement les amélioreraient encore. Des approches par ap- prentissage profond pourraient être développées, pour proposer une correction ne nécessitant pas de dispositif d'étalonnage [Afifi, 2018, Tian et al., 2020].

**Des données synthétiques** L'annotation de larges bases de données est longue, coûteuse et souvent sujettes à des erreurs d'annotations. Dans le cas de la détection de végétation, comment définir si un pixel contient de la végétation en bordure de feuille ? Par exemple, lorsqu'il présente un mélange spectral ? Annoter précisément des images dans ce cas de figure est difficile. Certaines techniques d'augmentation de données, permettent d'ajouter de la variabilité pour ce cas de figure. Dans cette thèse, nous avons proposé d'ajouter un bruit de perlin permettant de simuler de l'ombrage. Toutefois, superposer des images ne contenant que de la végétation à des images ne contenant que du sol, en proportion variable, permettrait peut-être d'apprendre des indices encore plus résistants, mais permettrait également d'obtenir la quantité de ce mélange. Concernant les données pour la détection des feuilles, [Ward et al., 2018] a montré qu'il était possible de construire des annotations RGB synthétiques pour la détection de ces individus. Il serait fort intéressant d'étendre cette méthode à des données multispectrales en lien avec notre caméra. Pour réaliser ces données synthétiques, je propose d'utiliser soit un moteur de rendu temps-réel telque l'UnrealEngine 5 [Qiu and Yuille, 2016], soit un moteur de rendu style path-tracing via Mitsuba 2 [Nimier-David et al., 2019], tous deux basés sur des rendus physiquement réalistes. En utilisant les modèles de BRDF à microfacet et les distributions GGX, différentes conditions d'acquisition et de rugosité de surface peuvent être aisément simulées. Notons de plus, que des méthodes d'informatiques graphiques permettent d'apprendre ces matériaux à partir d'un ensemble d'acquisitions [Dupuy et al., 2015]. L'utilisation de ces technologies permettraient d'obtenir des données synthétiques d'une qualité pour l'instant inexistante dans la littérature scientifique, en agriculture de précision.
**Détection des individus** La détection des objets est un sujet difficile en particulier en scène dense, tel qu'il a été vu dans cette thèse. L'approche qui a été proposée ici semble prometteuse avec la conception d'une nouvelle architecture CNN, qui s'appuie sur plusieurs recherches anciennes. Bien que les résultats obtenus soient bons, des recherches complémentaires semblent nécessaires. L'échelle de la feuille semble adéquate, mais celle de la foliole serait peut-être plus facile d'un point de vue détection des objets. De plus, d'autres méthodes pourraient être ajoutées à l'architecture CNN proposée. Par exemple, l'algorithme des basins versants [Bai and Urta-sun, 2017] qui est actuellement utilisé en post-traitement (après la sortie du CNN). L'ajout d'un espace latent semble aussi prometteur d'après [Kulikov et al., 2018] pour la segmenta-tion des feuilles. Enfin, comme nous l'avons vu, des améliorations sur la fonction de perte, et des techniques plus avancées d'augmentation des données doivent être explorée. En réalité, la construction de l'architecture d'un CNN est souvent empirique. Or, cette construction pourrait elle aussi être automatisée et améliorée à l'aide d'une optimisation des hyperparamètres. Mais cela nécessite des ressources de calcul qui n'étaient pas disponibles durant cette thèse.

**Extraction de propriétés** L'un des objectifs initiaux de la thèse était l'extraction et l'évaluation d'un ensemble de propriétés "standards" afin de définir leurs potentiels de discrimination pour la discrimination cultures/adventices. Il s'agissait de déterminer quels étaient les meilleurs d'entre eux. En réalité, ces caractéristiques sont fortement limitées par de nombreux facteurs. Ils ne permettent donc pas une classification parfaite. Aujourd'hui, l'apprentissage profond est la seule alternative compétitive qui pourrait permettre d'améliorer les résultats. En suivant la démarche qui a été entreprise dans cette thèse, une alternative basée sur les approximateurs de fonction est possible. On pourrait ainsi, définir les meilleures propriétés de forme à partir d'une représentation fixe du contour. De même pour les propriétés de texture et les propriétés spatiales. En réalité, un modèle type "UNet" synthétise déjà l'ensemble des caractéristiques de texture, de couleur et de spectre utilisables dans ce cadre de discrimination culture/adventices. De plus, les performances de l'extraction de ces caractéristiques ne permettent pas une utilisa-tion temps réel, ce qui renforce la nécessite d'étudier l'apprentissage profond pour cette dernière étape.

**Le numérique pour l'agroécologie - gestion adventices** Ces travaux sont d'une grande utilité dans le contexte de transition agroécologique où des systèmes de cultures innovants, sans recours aux herbicides, sont étudiés. En effet, ces systèmes contribueront au maintien de la production agricole et permettront de répondre aux besoins d'une population humaine croissante (9,5 millards en 2050), tout en préservant les ressources naturelles et en assurant la provision de services associés à la biodiversité des adventices (services de pollinisation, maintien de la biodiversité et des chaînes trophiques basées sur les adventices). Toutefois, ils seront moins robustes face aux aléas climatiques, aux attaques des ravageurs ou parasites, et nécessiteront une grande réactivité. Face à ce problème, les outils non-destructifs issus de la proxidétection permettront de caractériser finement la biodiversité dans les parcelles cultivées. Un suivi spatio-temporel d'une parcelle avec des outils de proxidétection combinés aux outils de télédétection et à la modélisation permettra de prédire ses évolutions et d'anticiper les interventions culturales. Ainsi, l'innovation peut être un levier pour accompagner les agriculteurs dans la transition agroécologique.
Table des figures

<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>1.1</td>
      <td>L'Anthropocène</td>
      <td>1</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.2</td>
      <td>Dynamique des systèmes : les différents imaginaires possibles</td>
      <td>2</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.3</td>
      <td>Remembrement des terres agricoles</td>
      <td>3</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.4</td>
      <td>Excédent d'azote dans la majorités des cours d'eau en 2013</td>
      <td>4</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.5</td>
      <td>Prolifération d'algues et asphyxie des milieux aquatiques</td>
      <td>4</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.6</td>
      <td>Presence de pesticide dans la majorités des cours d'eau en 2013</td>
      <td>5</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.7</td>
      <td>Cycle de l'agriculture de précision composé de 4 étapes</td>
      <td>8</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.8</td>
      <td>Évolution de la résolution spatiale</td>
      <td>9</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.9</td>
      <td>Simulation de l'agencement spatial de paysages</td>
      <td>10</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.10</td>
      <td>Concept de projet en agriculture numérique</td>
      <td>11</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.11</td>
      <td>Plantes bio-indicatrices, fixatrices et symbiotiques</td>
      <td>13</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.12</td>
      <td>Adventices comestibles</td>
      <td>13</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.13</td>
      <td>Adventices parasite, psychotrope et médicinal</td>
      <td>13</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.14</td>
      <td>Profondeur de germination en fonction de la masse des graines</td>
      <td>14</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.15</td>
      <td>Période préférentielle de germination de certaines adventices</td>
      <td>14</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.16</td>
      <td>Taux annuel de décroissance du stock semencier des adventices</td>
      <td>15</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.17</td>
      <td>Illustration de cinq fenêtres d'opportunité pour la gestion des adventices</td>
      <td>16</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.18</td>
      <td>Exemple de pulvérisateurs</td>
      <td>17</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.19</td>
      <td>Différentes formes de buses associées</td>
      <td>17</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.20</td>
      <td>Présentation du WeedSeeker en viticulture</td>
      <td>18</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.21</td>
      <td>Exemples de méthodes alternatives de désherbage</td>
      <td>18</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.22</td>
      <td>Les différents consortiums de l'ANR Challenge ROSE</td>
      <td>19</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.23</td>
      <td>Module de désherbage BIP-BIP</td>
      <td>19</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.24</td>
      <td>Les trois modules CarbonBee (caméra hyperspectrale, contrôleur, afficheur)</td>
      <td>20</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.25</td>
      <td>Électrode téléguidée par le bras robotique</td>
      <td>20</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.26</td>
      <td>Outil de binage ROSEAU</td>
      <td>20</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1.27</td>
      <td>Schéma de l'interaction entre le système climatique physique, l'exposition et la vulnérabilité produisant des risques dans la chaîne de production.</td>
      <td>21</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.1</td>
      <td>Étapes clés de l'analyse d'images agronomiques</td>
      <td>23</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.2</td>
      <td>Spectre électromagnétique et spectre visible</td>
      <td>24</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.3</td>
      <td>Les différents composants d'une caméra</td>
      <td>24</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.4</td>
      <td>Effet de la longueur de la focale sur le champ de vision</td>
      <td>25</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.5</td>
      <td>Effet de l'ouverture sur la profondeur de vision</td>
      <td>25</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.6</td>
      <td>Effet du gain sur le bruit de l'image</td>
      <td>25</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.7</td>
      <td>Effet du temps d'intégration (en seconde) sur le flou de bougé</td>
      <td>25</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.8</td>
      <td>Filtre de Bayer</td>
      <td>26</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.9</td>
      <td>Triple prismes pour diviser la lumière incidente</td>
      <td>26</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.10</td>
      <td>Filtre rotatif à 4 bandes spectrales : bleu, vert, rouge et infrarouge</td>
      <td>27</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.11</td>
      <td>Modèle de distorsion</td>
      <td>28</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.12</td>
      <td>Correction des couleurs par apprentissage profond proposé par Afifi</td>
      <td>29</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.13</td>
      <td>Différentes corrections radiométriques proposé par Honkavaara</td>
      <td>29</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.14</td>
      <td>Comparaison des méthodes de débruitage</td>
      <td>30</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.15</td>
      <td>Suppression de l'ombre par apprentissage profond proposé par Zhang</td>
      <td>30</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>2.16</td>
      <td>Signatures spectrales de certains matériaux</td>
      <td>31</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.17</td>
      <td>Structure cellulaire d'une feuille et interaction avec le spectre électromagnétique</td>
      <td>31</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.18</td>
      <td>Une faible activité photo-synthétique induit une faible valeur de NDVI</td>
      <td>32</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.19</td>
      <td>Segmentation Grabcut</td>
      <td>34</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.20</td>
      <td>Architecture encodeur-décodeur d'un réseau convolutif</td>
      <td>35</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.21</td>
      <td>Découpage régulier sans recouvrement</td>
      <td>36</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.22</td>
      <td>Analyse multi-échelle des super-pixels et classification</td>
      <td>37</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.23</td>
      <td>Exemple de watershed sur des images drones</td>
      <td>37</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.24</td>
      <td>Polygone initial, contour actif, et contour avec contrainte</td>
      <td>38</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.25</td>
      <td>Structure d'un réseau "You Only Look Once" (YOLO)</td>
      <td>38</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.26</td>
      <td>Architecture d'un réseau de type Mask-RCNN</td>
      <td>39</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.27</td>
      <td>Espace latent et instances associées aux clusters</td>
      <td>40</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.28</td>
      <td>Segmentation des instances par détection des contours des nucléus</td>
      <td>40</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.29</td>
      <td>Types de caractéristiques</td>
      <td>41</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.30</td>
      <td>Caractéristiques de la forme d'une feuille</td>
      <td>41</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.31</td>
      <td>Détection des rangs de culture et distance des adventices</td>
      <td>42</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.32</td>
      <td>Exemple de transformation d'une image de haricot</td>
      <td>42</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.33</td>
      <td>Exemple d'un CNN pour la classification de cellule</td>
      <td>43</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.34</td>
      <td>Taxonomie des algorithmes d'apprentissage machine</td>
      <td>44</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.35</td>
      <td>Règle de décision de Bayes</td>
      <td>45</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.36</td>
      <td>Classification KNN : influence de K et de l'heuristique</td>
      <td>45</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.37</td>
      <td>Perceptron</td>
      <td>46</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.38</td>
      <td>Arbre de décision simple en agriculture de précision</td>
      <td>46</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.39</td>
      <td>Algorithme de classification K-Mean</td>
      <td>47</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.40</td>
      <td>Illustration de la méthode de clustering DBSCAN</td>
      <td>47</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.41</td>
      <td>Optimisation de l'espace latent</td>
      <td>48</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.42</td>
      <td>Evaluation des performances d'un modèle après apprentissage</td>
      <td>49</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.43</td>
      <td>Architecture CNN proposée</td>
      <td>52</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.44</td>
      <td>Comparaison de la précision de reconnaissance entre décomposition en ondelettes et apprentissage profond, en fonction du nombre d'échantillons</td>
      <td>52</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.45</td>
      <td>Algorithme proposé par [Louargant et al., 2018], (a) détection des rangs (b) constitution d'une base d'apprentissage (c) classification spectrale et (d) reclassement des adventices intra-rangs</td>
      <td>53</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.46</td>
      <td>Schéma de la méthode proposée par [Bah et al., 2018a]</td>
      <td>54</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.47</td>
      <td>Images résultantes : (a) Image prétraitée. (b) Méthode 1, chaîne de traitement. (c) Méthode 2, Yolo. Et (d) Méthode 3, mask-RCNN.</td>
      <td>55</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>2.48</td>
      <td>Chaînes de traitement</td>
      <td>56</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.1</td>
      <td>Parcelle pour les premières expérimentations (rouge) à gauche et parcelles utilisées par le consortium ROSEAU (droite)</td>
      <td>57</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.2</td>
      <td>Système optique de la caméra Airphen (Société Hiphen, France)</td>
      <td>58</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.3</td>
      <td>Réponse spectrale des 6 filtres interférentiels placés devant les capteurs de la caméra multispectrale</td>
      <td>58</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.4</td>
      <td>Robot et caméra utilisés par le consortium ROSEAU</td>
      <td>59</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.5</td>
      <td>Fausses couleurs à gauche et vérité terrain manuelle correspondante à droite</td>
      <td>60</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.6</td>
      <td>Annotation pour la discrimination des feuilles, entre culture et adventices</td>
      <td>60</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.7</td>
      <td>Exemples issues de la base de données CVPPP (haut) et vérité terrain (bas)</td>
      <td>61</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.8</td>
      <td>Exemples issues de la base de données Komatsuna (haut) et vérité terrain (bas)</td>
      <td>61</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>3.9</td>
      <td>Relation entre paramètres du monde réel et ceux du monde virtuel</td>
      <td>62</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.10</td>
      <td>Échiquier de calibration géométrique</td>
      <td>63</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.11</td>
      <td>Visualisation de la correction géométrique pour la bande 450 nm</td>
      <td>64</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.12</td>
      <td>Image non recalée, prise à 1.60 m</td>
      <td>65</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.13</td>
      <td>Disposition of each band on the Airphen multi-sensors camera</td>
      <td>68</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.14</td>
      <td>Each step of the alignment procedure, with (step 1) roughly corrected from affine correction and (step 2) enhancement via key-points and perspective</td>
      <td>69</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.15</td>
      <td>Gradient orientation in spectral band [Rabatel and Labbe, 2016]. Orientation of the gradient is not the same depending to the spectral band.</td>
      <td>70</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.16</td>
      <td>Example of each correction and the manufacturers results</td>
      <td>72</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.17</td>
      <td>Affine matrix value by height</td>
      <td>72</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.18</td>
      <td>Affine matrix value by height</td>
      <td>73</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.19</td>
      <td>features extractor performances after filtering and homography association</td>
      <td>74</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.20</td>
      <td>key-point extractor performances</td>
      <td>75</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>3.21</td>
      <td>(up) The mean distance of detected key-point before perspective correction with 570 nm as spectral reference (down) Perspective re-projection error with GFTT using the first modality and 570 nm as reference</td>
      <td>75</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.1</td>
      <td>AIRPHEN camera composed of 6 sensors</td>
      <td>83</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.2</td>
      <td>False color in the left and corresponding manual ground truth on the right.</td>
      <td>84</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.3</td>
      <td>Linear combination model.</td>
      <td>86</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.4</td>
      <td>Linear ratio model.</td>
      <td>86</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.5</td>
      <td>Polynomial model with Bernstein expansions between B<sub>4,1</sub> and B<sub>4,4</sub>.</td>
      <td>87</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.6</td>
      <td>Universal function approximation model (depth = 3, width = 5).</td>
      <td>88</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.7</td>
      <td>Dense-morphological model.</td>
      <td>88</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.8</td>
      <td>Input Band Filter inserted at the beginning of the model.</td>
      <td>89</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.9</td>
      <td>Spatial refinement block inserted at the end of a model.</td>
      <td>89</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.10</td>
      <td>Optimized model for standard indices</td>
      <td>91</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.11</td>
      <td>Network synthesis with ibf, evaluated index equation, and sprb.</td>
      <td>93</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.12</td>
      <td>first 80 epochs of loss of generic models with ibf in kernel size of 1.</td>
      <td>96</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.13</td>
      <td>Correct vegetation/soil discrimination despite shadows.</td>
      <td>97</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.14</td>
      <td>Vegetation/soil discrimination issue with abrupt transition between shadow and light.</td>
      <td>97</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.15</td>
      <td>Vegetation/soil discrimination issue caused by specular lights on leaves.</td>
      <td>98</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>4.16</td>
      <td>Visual comparison between some relevant models. NDVI (63.98 mIoU), MTVI1 (73.71 mIoU), linear 1 baseline (78.58 mIoU), dense 7 ibf-sprb (82.19 mIoU). Blue indicates sure soil, red indicates sure vegetation, and the other colors indicate uncertainty.</td>
      <td>101</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.1</td>
      <td>Mélange de haricot (culture) et de moutarde (adventice) dans le challenge RoSE</td>
      <td>103</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.2</td>
      <td>Structure d'un réseau "You Only Look Once" (YOLO)</td>
      <td>104</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.3</td>
      <td>Aerial view of the experimentation plot located in Montoldre (now INRAE)</td>
      <td>108</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.4</td>
      <td>The experimental set-up : the multispectral camera and the robotic plateform</td>
      <td>109</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.5</td>
      <td>Example of images from the CVPPP dataset (top) and their corresponding ground truth (bottom)</td>
      <td>109</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.6</td>
      <td>Example of RGB images from the Komatsuna dataset (top) and their corresponding ground truth (bottom)</td>
      <td>110</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.7</td>
      <td>Diagram of the CNN network architecture and losses (dotted). Multiple arrow show concatenation as input layer.</td>
      <td>111</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>5.8</td>
      <td>Example of input data : from left to right, the first three bands (RGB) of the Airphen multispectral camera, three edge classes and the inner of individual class</td>
      <td>111</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.9</td>
      <td>Universal function approximator based on DenseNet. Multiple arrows shows concatenation as input layer</td>
      <td>112</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.10</td>
      <td>Synthesis of the core network based on MFP-Unet. Red arrows shows MaxPoo-ling. Blue arrows shows Conv+UpSampling. Black arrows shows Conv. Sub-scale ratio are labelled on corresponding layer. The final output is the concatenation of features UpSampling. Multiple arrows shows concatenation as input layer</td>
      <td>113</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.11</td>
      <td>Auxiliary output and classification module. Multiple arrows shows concatenation as input layer</td>
      <td>114</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.12</td>
      <td>Sorted histogram of the number of pixels associated to each component, the blue (resp. red) line represents the true (resp. predicted) number of pixels for each component.</td>
      <td>115</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.13</td>
      <td>The refinement of the CNN output through watershed and Deep-Indices. The Seed of the equation 5.5 can be seen on the “watershed seed” image.</td>
      <td>116</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.14</td>
      <td>Visual comparison of Komatsuna dataset after the training, the red arrow in the input image shows a green bottle</td>
      <td>118</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.15</td>
      <td>Visual example of LSC results for A1</td>
      <td>121</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.16</td>
      <td>Visual example of LSC results for A2</td>
      <td>121</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.17</td>
      <td>Visual example of LSC results for A3</td>
      <td>122</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.18</td>
      <td>Visual example of LSC results for A4</td>
      <td>122</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.19</td>
      <td>Example of the visual results for the Airphen dataset</td>
      <td>124</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>5.20</td>
      <td>Example of the Watershed output versus Mask-RCNN for Airphen dataset</td>
      <td>125</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>6.1</td>
      <td>key steps of image analysis for crop/weed discrimination with (a) acquisition enhancement (b) vegetation indices (c) instance segmentation (d) feature ex-traction (e) classification</td>
      <td>131</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>6.2</td>
      <td>Aerial view of the experimentation plot located in Montoldre (now INRAE)</td>
      <td>133</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>6.3</td>
      <td>The Airphen six-band multispectral camera</td>
      <td>133</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>6.4</td>
      <td>Hyperparameter optimization procedure</td>
      <td>140</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>6.5</td>
      <td>Sequential Feature Selection Algorithm</td>
      <td>141</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>6.6</td>
      <td>Best features among all extracted feature for classification through ASHA algo-rithm. Best overall result is highlighted.</td>
      <td>145</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>6.7</td>
      <td>This figure shows the classification of leaves, from an image taken in June 2019. The blue color corresponds to well classified weeds. The green color corresponds to well classified crops. While the purple and red color correspond respectively to weeds and crops poorly classified.</td>
      <td>146</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>6.8</td>
      <td>This figure shows the classification of leaves, from parts of four images taken in June 2019. The blue color corresponds to well classified weeds. The green color corresponds to well classified crops. While the purple and red color correspond respectively to weeds and crops poorly classified. Here we see that leaves bet-ween crop rows are correctly classified, as are monocots. On the other hand, the emerging leaves of crops and some weed type leaves of dicotyledons are incorrect.</td>
      <td>147</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>7.1</td>
      <td>Pipeline final pour la détection et la discrimination des adventices</td>
      <td>154</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
## Liste des tableaux

<table><tr><td>2.1</td><td>Invariance et sources d'erreurs pour ces trois types de propriétés</td><td>43</td></tr><tr><td>3.1</td><td>Dates d'acquisition, cultures et nombre d'images acquises</td><td>59</td></tr><tr><td>3.2</td><td>Nombre d'images obtenues lors des campagnes d'acquisition du challenge RoSE</td><td>59</td></tr><tr><td>3.3</td><td>Résolution spatiale des images à différentes hauteurs</td><td>62</td></tr><tr><td>3.4</td><td>Érreur résiduelle, en pixel, après correction géométrique</td><td>63</td></tr><tr><td>3.5</td><td>Correction de la lentille pour la bande spectral 450 nm</td><td>64</td></tr><tr><td>3.6</td><td>list of algorithms with 3 modalities of their parameters</td><td>71</td></tr><tr><td>4.1</td><td>Acquisition sources and global illumination.</td><td>83</td></tr><tr><td>4.2</td><td>Synthesized standard indices performances : the nine best models are presented.</td><td>92</td></tr><tr><td>4.3</td><td>Score of DeepIndices with/without ibf and sprb for a kernel size of 1</td><td>93</td></tr><tr><td>4.4</td><td>Score of DeepIndices with/without ibf and sprb for a kernel size of 3</td><td>93</td></tr><tr><td>4.5</td><td>Score of DeepIndices with/without ibf and sprb for a kernel size of 5</td><td>94</td></tr><tr><td>4.6</td><td>Score of DeepIndices with/without ibf and sprb for a kernel size of 7</td><td>94</td></tr><tr><td>4.7</td><td>Score of DeepIndices in different modalities for a kernel size of 1 without initial image processing</td><td>95</td></tr><tr><td>4.8</td><td>Top optimized fixed vegetation model equations</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td>5.1</td><td>Evaluation metrics for the Komatsuna dataset</td><td>118</td></tr><tr><td>5.2</td><td>Comparison of the ResNet 101 based on Detectron II framework of facebook and the UPGen based on Mask-RCNN. Our solution is the most effective in both metrics.</td><td>119</td></tr><tr><td>5.3</td><td>Number of images for each sub LSC dataset</td><td>119</td></tr><tr><td>5.4</td><td>Evaluation metrics of the overall LSC dataset</td><td>120</td></tr><tr><td>5.5</td><td>Evaluation metrics of the independent sub LSC dataset</td><td>120</td></tr><tr><td>5.6</td><td>Comparison of our solution with state-of-the-art challengers in this dataset.</td><td>123</td></tr><tr><td>5.7</td><td>Evaluation metrics for the Airphen dataset</td><td>123</td></tr><tr><td>5.8</td><td>Evaluation metrics for the Airphen dataset using Mask-RCNN</td><td>124</td></tr><tr><td>6.1</td><td>Synthesis of colors moments</td><td>137</td></tr><tr><td>6.2</td><td>Five epochs of the optimization procedure through ASHA algorithm. The objective column shows the model performance</td><td>140</td></tr><tr><td>6.3</td><td>Hyperparameter optimization through ASHA algorithm, the objective column shows the performance of the underlying classifier</td><td>142</td></tr><tr><td>6.4</td><td>Feature optimization through ASHA algorithm. To show the importance of the feature optimisation process, we added the column Worst, which is the least discriminant parameters. The column Objective shows the best performance of the model.</td><td>142</td></tr><tr><td>6.5</td><td>Best features for spatial features. Best results for a specific feature count are highlighted</td><td>143</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>6.6</td><td>Best classification features for each feature type through ASHA algorithm. Each line presents the results for a specific feature type. The feature count is the number of feature(s) combined for a specific feature type. The presented results are the optimal combinations for each feature counts. Column “full” is the result obtained with all the features for a specific feature type. Best results for a type of features are in bold, best results for a specific feature count are highlighted.</td><td>143</td></tr><tr><td>6.7</td><td>Best features individually for each feature type for classification through ASHA algorithm. Each line presents the results for a specific feature type. The feature count is the number of feature(s) combined for a specific feature type. The presented results are the optimal combinations for each feature counts. Column “full” is the result obtained with all the features for a specific feature type. Best results for a type of features are in bold, best results for a specific feature count are highlighted.</td><td>144</td></tr><tr><td>6.8</td><td>Number of features after hyperparameter optimization (FV) and number of hyperparameters (HP) per feature extraction methods</td><td>150</td></tr><tr><td>6.9</td><td>Top features for each shape types</td><td>150</td></tr><tr><td>6.10</td><td>Top 10 for each spectral types</td><td>151</td></tr></table>
Bibliographie

[Shu, 2012] (2012). Chapter 1 - a systematic view of remote sensing. In Liang, S., Li, X., and Wang, J., editors, *Advanced Remote Sensing*, pages 1 – 31. Academic Press, Boston.

[Aberkane, 2015] Aberkane, I. J. (2015). *Économie de la connaissance*. Fondapol, Fondation pour l'innovation politique.

[Afifi, 2018] Afifi, M. (2018). Semantic white balance : Semantic color constancy using convolutional neural network. *CoRR*, abs/1802.00153.

[Aggarwal and Ranganathan, 2016] Aggarwal, R. and Ranganathan, P. (2016). Common pitfalls in statistical analysis : The use of correlation techniques. *Perspectives in Clinical Research*, 7 :187.

[Ahmed et al., 2012] Ahmed, F., Al-Mamun, H. A., Bari, A. H., Hossain, E., and Kwan, P. (2012). Classification of crops and weeds from digital images : A support vector machine approach. *Crop Protection*, 40 :98–104.

[Ahmed et al., 2016] Ahmed, N., Khan, M. U., and Asif, S. (2016). An automatic leaf based plant identification system. *Science International-Lahore*, 28 :427–430.

[Al Naser, 2018] Al Naser, O. (2018). *Effet des conditions environnementales sur les caractéristiques morpho-physiologiques et la teneur en métabolites secondaires chez Inula montana : une plante de la médecine traditionnelle Provençale*. Theses, Université d'Avignon.

[Albarracín et al., 2020] Albarracín, J., Oliveira, R., Hirota, M., Santos, J., and Torres, R. (2020). A soft computing approach for selecting and combining spectral bands. *Remote Sensing*, 12:1–22.

[Alcantarilla and Solutions, 2011] Alcantarilla, P. F. and Solutions, T. (2011). Fast explicit diffusion for accelerated features in nonlinear scale spaces. *IEEE Trans. Patt. Anal. Mach. Intell*, 34(7) :1281–1298.

[Ali et al., 2016] Ali, F., Khan, S. U., Mahmudi, M. Z., and Ullah, R. (2016). A comparison of fast, surf, eigen, harris, and mser features. *International Journal of Computer Engineering and Information Technology*, 8(6) :100.

[Altieri, 1999] Altieri, M. A. (1999). The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. In *Invertebrate biodiversity as bioindicators of sustainable landscapes*, pages 19–31. Elsevier.

[Altieri, 2018] Altieri, M. A. (2018). *Agroecology : the science of sustainable agriculture*. CRC Press.

[Amziane et al., 2021] Amziane, A., Losson, O., Mathon, B., Dumenil, A., and Macaire, L. (2021). Reflectance estimation from multispectral linescan acquisitions under varying illumination—application to outdoor weed identification. *Sensors*, 21(11).

[Angel et al., 2010] Angel, S., Parent, J., and Civco, D. L. (2010). Ten compactness properties of circles : measuring shape in geography. *The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien*, 54(4) :441–461.

[Anthony and Gratiot, 2012] Anthony, E. J. and Gratiot, N. (2012). Coastal engineering and large-scale mangrove destruction in guyana, south america : Averting an environmental catastrophe in the making. *Ecological Engineering*, 47 :268–273.
[Armstrong, 2019] Armstrong, R. A. (2019). Should pearson's correlation coefficient be avoided? *Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics*, 39(5):316-327.

[Aubertot et al., 2005] Aubertot, J.-N., Barbier, J. M., Carpentier, A., Gril, J.-J., Guichard, L., Lucas, P., Savary, S., Savini, I., and Voltz, M. (2005). Pesticides, agriculture et environnement. *Réduire l'utilisation des pesticides et en limiter les impacts environnementaux. Rapport d'expertise scientifique collective, INRA et Cemagref (France).*

[Avrin et al., 2020] Avrin, G., Boffety, D., Lardy-Fontan, S., Régnier, R., Rescoussié, R., and Barbosa, V. (2020). Design and validation of testing facilities for weeding robots as part of rose challenge. In *1st International Workshop on Evaluating Progress in Artificial Intelligence (EPAI).*

[Bae et al., 2018] Bae, H.-J., Kim, C.-W., Kim, N., Park, B., Kim, N., Seo, J. B., and Lee, S. M. (2018). A perlin noise-based augmentation strategy for deep learning with small data samples of hrct images. *Scientific Reports*, 8.

[Bagnoud and Recordon, 2020] Bagnoud, A. and Recordon, J. (2020). Le sikkim et la révolution biologique.

[Bah et al., 2018a] Bah, M. D., Hafiane, A., and Canals, R. (2018a). Deep learning with unsupervised data labeling for weed detection in line crops in uav images. *Remote Sensing*, 10(11).

[Bah et al., 2018b] Bah, M. D., Hafiane, A., and Canals, R. (2018b). Deep learning with unsupervised data labeling for weeds detection on UAV images. CoRR, abs/1805.12395.

[Bah et al., 2019] Bah, M. D., Hafiane, A., and Canals, R. (2019). Crownet: Deep network for crop row detection in uav images. *IEEE Access*, 8:5189-5200.

[Bai and Urtasun, 2017] Bai, M. and Urtasun, R. (2017). Deep watershed transform for instance segmentation. In *2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)*, pages 2858-2866.

[Bajwa et al., 2019] Bajwa, A. A., Khan, M. J., Bhowmik, P. C., Walsh, M., and Chauhan, B. S. (2019). Sustainable weed management. In *Innovations in Sustainable Agriculture*, pages 249-286. Springer.

[Bajwa and Tian, 2002] Bajwa, S. and Tian, L. (2002). Multispectral cir image calibration for cloud shadow and soil background influence using intensity normalization. *Applied engineering in agriculture*, 18:627-635.

[Bakhshipour et al., 2017] Bakhshipour, A., Jafari, A., Nassiri, S. M., and Zare, D. (2017). Weed segmentation using texture features extracted from wavelet sub-images. *Biosystems Engineering*, 157:1-12.

[Banerji et al., 2012] Banerji, S., Verma, A., and Liu, C. (2012). Lbp and color descriptors for image classification. In *Cross Disciplinary Biometric Systems*, pages 205-225. Springer.

[Bannari et al., 1995] Bannari, A., Morin, D., Bonn, F., and Huete, A. (1995). A review of vegetation indices. *Remote sensing reviews*, 13(1-2):95-120.

[Barbu, 2009] Barbu, A. (2009). Training an active random field for real-time image denoising. *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, 18(11):2451-2462.

[Bareth et al., 2016] Bareth, G., Bolten, A., Gnyp, M. L., Reusch, S., and Jasper, J. (2016). Comparison of Uncalibrated Rgbvi with Spectrometer-Based Ndvi Derived from Uav Sensing Systems on Field Scale. *ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences*, 41B8:837-843.
[Bay et al., 2006] Bay, H., Tuytelaars, T., and Van Gool, L. (2006). Surf: Speeded up robust features. In *European conference on computer vision*, pages 404–417. Springer.

[Bedos et al., 2002] Bedos, C., Cellier, P., Calvet, R., Barriuso, E., and Gabrielle, B. (2002). Mass transfer of pesticides into the atmosphere by volatilization from soils and plants : overview. *Agronomie*, 22(1):21–33.

[Beketov et al., 2013] Beketov, M. A., Kefford, B. J., Schäfer, R. B., and Liess, M. (2013). Pesticides reduce regional biodiversity of stream invertebrates. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, 110(27):11039–11043.

[Bell and Dee, 2019] Bell, J. and Dee, H. M. (2019). Leaf segmentation through the classification of edges.

[Bellon-Maurel and Huyghe, 2019] Bellon-Maurel, V. and Huyghe, C. (2019). Avant-propos. *Sciences Eaux Territoires*, (3):3–5.

[Bellon Maurel and HUYGHE, 2019] Bellon Maurel, V. and HUYGHE, C. (2019). Digital agriculture, a (r)evolution in progress in the territories ? - Foreword. *Sciences Eaux & Territoires*, (29):3–5.

[Belongie et al., 2002] Belongie, S., Malik, J., and Puzicha, J. (2002). Shape matching and object recognition using shape contexts. *IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence*, 24(4):509–522.

[Ben Abdallah et al., 2016] Ben Abdallah, F., Goffart, J. P., and Philippe, W. (2016). Utilisation de la fluorescence chlorophyllienne pour l'évaluation du statut azoté des cultures (synthèse bibliographique). *Biotechnologie, agronomie, société et environnement*, 20(1):83-93.

[Bendaoud, 2020] Bendaoud, A. (2020). *Le semis direct sous couvert végétal vivant : comme une solution alternative aux systèmes de cultures conventionnels en zones arides des steppes algériennes*. PhD thesis, Université Mohamed Khider de Biskra.

[Bergstra and Bengio, 2012] Bergstra, J. and Bengio, Y. (2012). Random search for hyper-parameter optimization. *Journal of machine learning research*, 13(2).

[Bianchi et al., 2006] Bianchi, F. J., Booij, C., and Tscharntke, T. (2006). Sustainable pest regulation in agricultural landscapes : a review on landscape composition, biodiversity and natural pest control. *Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences*, 273(1595):1715-1727.

[Birner et al., 2021] Birner, R., Daum, T., and Pray, C. (2021). Who drives the digital revolution in agriculture ? a review of supply-side trends, players and challenges. *Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy*, 43(4):1260–1285.

[Blackburn and Vignola, 2012] Blackburn, G. and Vignola, F. (2012). Spectral distributions of diffuse and global irradiance for clear and cloudy periods. In *World Renewable Energy Forum, Denver, CO*.

[Boissinot et al., 2014] Boissinot, A., Braconnier, H., Braconnier, J.-C., Braconnier, H., Braconnier, N., Morin-Pinaud, S., and Grillet, P. (2014). *Terres de bocage : concilier nature et agriculture*. Editions Ouest-France.

[Bokhovkin and Burnaev, 2019] Bokhovkin, A. and Burnaev, E. (2019). Boundary loss for remote sensing imagery semantic segmentation. *CoRR*, abs/1905.07852.

[Bonneau et al., 2021] Bonneau, M., Benet, B., Labrune, Y., Bailly, J., Ricard, E., and Canario, L. (2021). Predicting sow postures from video images : Comparison of convolutional neural networks and segmentation combined with support vector machines under various training and testing setups. *Biosystems Engineering*, 212:19–29.
[Bonneau et al., 2020] Bonneau, M., Vayssade, J.-A., Troupe, W., and Arquet, R. (2020). Outdoor animal tracking combining neural network and time-lapse cameras. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 168:105150.

[Bookstein, 1989] Bookstein, F. L. (1989). Principal warps : thin-plate splines and the decomposition of deformations. *IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence*, 11(6):567-585.

[Bossard et al., 2016] Bossard, C., Santin, G., and Canu, I. G. (2016). Suicide among farmers in france : Occupational factors and recent trends. *Journal of Agromedicine*, 21(4):310-315. PMID: 27409004.

[Bossu, 2007] Bossu, J. (2007). *Segmentation d'images pour la localisation d'adventices : application à la réalisation d'un système de vision pour une pulvérisation spécifique en temps réel*. PhD thesis, Dijon.

[Bouguet, 2001] Bouguet, J.-Y. (2001). Camera calibration toolbox for matlab.

[Brabandere et al., 2017] Brabandere, B. D., Neven, D., and Gool, L. V. (2017). Semantic instance segmentation with a discriminative loss function. *CoRR*, abs/1708.02551.

[Brainard and Wandell, 1992] Brainard, D. H. and Wandell, B. A. (1992). Asymmetric color matching : how color appearance depends on the illuminant. *JOSA A*, 9(9):1433-1448.

[Brilhador et al., 2019] Brilhador, A., Gutoski, M., Hattori, L. T., de Souza Inácio, A., Lazaretti, A. E., and Lopes, H. S. (2019). Classification of weeds and crops at the pixel-level using convolutional neural networks and data augmentation. In *2019 IEEE Latin American Conference on Computational Intelligence (LA-CCI)*, pages 1-6. IEEE.

[Brown, 2006] Brown, A. (2006). Spectral curve fitting for automatic hyperspectral data analysis. *IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing*, 44(6):1601-1608.

[Buades et al., 2005] Buades, A., Coll, B., and Morel, J. (2005). A review of image denoising algorithms, with a new one. *Multiscale Modeling & Simulation*, 4(2):490-530.

[Cabrera-Bosquet et al., 2012] Cabrera-Bosquet, L., Crossa, J., von Zitzewitz, J., Serret, M. D., and Luis Araus, J. (2012). High-throughput phenotyping and genomic selection : The frontiers of crop breeding converge f. *Journal of integrative plant biology*, 54(5):312-320.

[Caquet et al., 2020] Caquet, T., Gascuel, C., and Tixier-Boichard, M. (2020). *Agroécologie : des recherches pour la transition des filières et des territoires*. Quae.

[Carbonne, 2020] Carbonne, B. (2020). *Le rôle des interactions biotiques dans un système proie-prédateur : le cas de la prédation et de la régulation des graines d'adventices par les carabes*. Theses, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté.

[Carles, 2007] Carles, P. (2007). *Volem rien foutre al païs*. CP Productions [éd.].

[Caussanel, 1989] Caussanel, J. (1989). Nuisibilité et seuils de nuisibilité des mauvaises herbes dans une culture annuelle : situation de concurrence bispécifique. *Agronomie*, 9(3):219-240.

[Cerutti et al., 2014] Cerutti, G., Tougne, L., Coquin, D., and Vacavant, A. (2014). Leaf margins as sequences : A structural approach to leaf identification. *Pattern Recognition Letters*, 49:177-184.

[Cerutti et al., 2011] Cerutti, G., Tougne, L., Mille, J., Vacavant, A., and Coquin, D. (2011). Guiding active contours for tree leaf segmentation and identification. volume 1177.

[Cerutti et al., 2013] Cerutti, G., Tougne, L., Mille, J., Vacavant, A., and Coquin, D. (2013). Understanding leaves in natural images - a model-based approach for tree species identification. *Computer Vision and Image Understanding*, 117.
[Champ et al., 2020] Champ, J., Mora-Fallas, A., Goëau, H., Mata-Montero, E., Bonnet, P., and Joly, A. (2020). Instance segmentation for the fine detection of crop and weed plants by precision agricultural robots. *Applications in Plant Sciences*, 8(7):e11373.

[Chaudhury and Dabhade, 2016] Chaudhury, K. N. and Dabhade, S. D. (2016). Fast and provably accurate bilateral filtering. *CoRR*, abs/1603.08109.

[Chaumeil, 1939] Chaumeil, L. (1939). Les travaux et les jours d'un paysan auvergnat. In *Annales de géographie*, volume 48, pages 138-162. JSTOR.

[Chauvel et al., 2018] Chauvel, B., Darmency, H., Munier-Jolain, N., and Rodriguez, A. (2018). *Gestion durable de la flore adventice des cultures*. Editions Quae.

[Chebrolu et al., 2017] Chebrolu, N., Lottes, P., Schaefer, A., Winterhalter, W., Burgard, W., and Stachniss, C. (2017). Agricultural robot dataset for plant classification, localization and mapping on sugar beet fields. *The International Journal of Robotics Research*, 36:027836491772051.

[Chen et al., 2016] Chen, H., Qi, X., Yu, L., and Heng, P.-A. (2016). Dcan: Deep contour-aware networks for accurate gland segmentation.

[Chen et al., 2018] Chen, S., Shen, H., Li, C., and Xin, J. H. (2018). Normalized total gradient: A new measure for multispectral image registration. *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, 27(3):1297-1310.

[Choi et al., 2019] Choi, H., Lee, H.-J., You, H.-J., Rhee, S.-Y., and Jeon, W.-S. (2019). Comparative analysis of generalized intersection over union and error matrix for vegetation cover classification assessment. *Sensors and Materials*, 31:3849.

[Colbach et al., 2021] Colbach, N., Colas, F., Cordeau, S., Maillot, T., Queyrel, W., Villerd, J., and Moreau, D. (2021). The florsys crop-weed canopy model, a tool to investigate and promote agroecological weed management. *Field Crops Research*, 261:108006.

[Colbach et al., 2010] Colbach, N., Kurstjens, D., Munier-Jolain, N., Dalbiès, A., and Doré, T. (2010). Assessing non-chemical weeding strategies through mechanistic modelling of black-grass (alopecurus myosuroides huds.) dynamics. *European Journal of Agronomy*, 32(3):205-218.

[cordeau et al., 2016] cordeau, S., Dessaint, F., Deneuil, C., Bonin, L., Vuillemin, F., Delattre, M., Alain, R., Guillemin, J.-P., and Chauvel, B. (2016). La nuisibilité directe des adventices en grandes cultures: quelles réponses nous apportent les essais désherbages? 23. Conférence du COLUMA - Journées Internationales sur la Lutte contre les Mauvaises Herbes. Poster - SPEEAGESTADAGROSUPINRA.

[Cordeau et al., 2016] Cordeau, S., Dessaint, F., Denieul, C., Bonin, L., Vuillemin, F., Delattre, M., Rodriguez, A., Guillemin, J., and Chauvel, B. (2016). La nuisibilité direct des adventices en grandes cultures: quelles réponses nous apportent les essais désherbage. In *23e Conférence du COLUMA-journées internationales sur la lutte contre les mauvaises herbes, DIJON*, volume 6.

[CORNET et al., 2018] CORNET, D., Cormier, F., Arnau, G., Mell, P., Pavis, C., Desfontaines, L., and Tournebize, R. (2018). Recent advances in yam crop physiology and perspectives for breeding strategies. In *2. International Yam Crop Science Workshop (IYCSW)*, Tokyo, Japan. Tokyo University of Agriculture (Tokyo NODAI). Tokyo, JPN.

[Cossart and Fressard, 2019] Cossart, E. and Fressard, M. (2019). Érosion des sols viticoles: influence de la structuration globale du bassin-versant: strategies collectives pour casser l'enchaînement des processus érosifs. *Revue des oenologues et des techniques vitivinicoles et oenologiques: magazine trimestriel d'information professionnelle*, 46(171):24-26.
[Cramer et al., 2011] Cramer, G. R., Urano, K., Delrot, S., Pezzotti, M., and Shinozaki, K. (2011). Effects of abiotic stress on plants: a systems biology perspective. *BMC plant biology*, 11(1):1-14.

[Cui et al., 2019] Cui, Y., Zhang, G., Liu, Z., Xiong, Z., and Hu, J. (2019). A deep learning algorithm for one-step contour aware nuclei segmentation of histopathology images. *Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing*, 57(9):2027-2043.

[Dainese and Martin, 2019] Dainese, M. and Martin, E. A. (2019). A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production. *Science Advances*, 5(10).

[Dantas Dias Junior et al., 2019] Dantas Dias Junior, J., Backes, A., and Escarpinati, M. (2019). Detection of control points for uav-multispectral sensed data registration through the combining of feature descriptors. pages 444-451.

[Day, 2017] Day, E. O. (2017). Earth overshoot day. *Hentet fra https://www.overshootday.org*.

[De Castro et al., 2018] De Castro, A. I., Torres-Sánchez, J., Peña, J. M., Jiménez-Brenes, F. M., Csillik, O., and López-Granados, F. (2018). An automatic random forest-obia algorithm for early weed mapping between and within crop rows using uav imagery. *Remote Sensing*, 10(2).

[Délye, 2017] Délye, C. (2017). État des lieux des résistances aux herbicides en France : grandes cultures et maraîchage. In *Journées d'Échanges sur les Résistances aux produits de protection des plantes 2017*, volume Comptes-rendus des Journées d'Échanges sur les Résistances aux produits de protection des plantes 2017, page 49 p., Bordeaux, France. Réseau de Réflexion et de Recherche sur les Résistances aux Pesticides (R4P). FRA.

[Derrode and Pieczynski, 2003] Derrode, S. and Pieczynski, W. (2003). Segmentation non supervisée d'images par chaîne de markov couple.

[Descour and Dereniak, 1995] Descour, M. and Dereniak, E. (1995). Computed-tomography imaging spectrometer : experimental calibration and reconstruction results. *Applied optics*, 34(22):4817-4826.

[Dhawale et al., 2021] Dhawale, N., Adamchuk, V., Prasher, S., and Viscarra Rossel, R. (2021). Evaluating the precision and accuracy of proximal soil vis-nir sensors for estimating soil organic matter and texture. *Soil Systems*, 5:48.

[Di Gregorio et al., 2008] Di Gregorio, R. et al. (2008). Review and comparison of the metrics proposed for measuring the distance between two rigid-body poses. *Quaderni del DIEM-GMA, Atti della Seconda Giornata di Studio Ettore Funaioli*, pages 47-58.

[Dixit et al., 2019] Dixit, A., Goswami, A., and Jain, S. (2019). Development and evaluation of a new “snow water index (swi)” for accurate snow cover delineation. *Remote Sensing*, 11(23).

[Donoser and Bischof, 2006] Donoser, M. and Bischof, H. (2006). Efficient maximally stable extremal region (mser) tracking. In *2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'06)*, volume 1, pages 553-560. Ieee.

[dos Reis Martins et al., 2009] dos Reis Martins, M., Corá, J. E., Jorge, R. F., and Marcelo, A. V. (2009). Crop type influences soil aggregation and organic matter under no-tillage. *Soil and Tillage Research*, 104(1):22-29.

[Douarre et al., 2019] Douarre, C., Crispim-Junior, C. F., Gelibert, A., Tougne, L., and Rousseau, D. (2019). A strategy for multimodal canopy images registration. In *7th International Workshop on Image Analysis Methods in the Plant Sciences*, Lyon, France.
[Dubuisson et al., 2007] Dubuisson, C., Héraud, F., Leblanc, J.-C., Gallotti, S., Flamand, C., Blateau, A., Quenel, P., and Volatier, J.-L. (2007). Impact of subsistence production on the management options to reduce the food exposure of the martinican population to chlordecone. *Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology*, 49(1):5-16.

[Dufour and Piégay, 2009] Dufour, S. and Piégay, H. (2009). From the myth of a lost paradise to targeted river restoration: forget natural references and focus on human benefits. *River research and applications*, 25(5):568-581.

[Dunsmore, 1966] Dunsmore, I. (1966). A bayesian approach to classification. *Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological)*, 28(3):568-577.

[Dupuy et al., 2015] Dupuy, J., Heitz, E., Iehl, J.-C., Poulin, P., and Ostromoukhov, V. (2015). Extracting microfacet-based brdf parameters from arbitrary materials with power iterations. In *Computer Graphics Forum*, volume 34, pages 21-30. Wiley Online Library.

[Dutta and Zisserman, 2019] Dutta, A. and Zisserman, A. (2019). The VIA annotation software for images, audio and video. In *Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Multimedia*, MM '19, New York, NY, USA. ACM.

[El Amine et al., 2018] El Amine, S., Rapior, S., Morel, S., and Alain, D. (2018). *MON JAR-DIN PERMACULTUREL / MY PERMACULTURAL GARDEN*. PhD thesis.

[Elbeltagi et al., 2021] Elbeltagi, A., Kumari, N., Dharpure, J. K., Mokhtar, A., Alsafadi, K., Kumar, M., Mehdinejadiani, B., Ramezani Etedali, H., Brouziyne, Y., Towfiqul Islam, A. R. M., and Kuriqi, A. (2021). Prediction of combined terrestrial evapotranspiration index (ctei) over large river basin based on machine learning approaches. *Water*, 13(4).

[Erdem and Tari, 2010] Erdem, A. and Tari, S. (2010). A similarity-based approach for shape classification using aslan skeletons. *Pattern Recognition Letters*, 31(13):2024-2032. Metaheuristic Intelligence Based Image Processing.

[Eschweiler et al., 2018] Eschweiler, D., Spina, T. V., Choudhury, R. C., Meyerowitz, E., Cunha, A., and Stegmaier, J. (2018). Cnn-based preprocessing to optimize watershed-based cell segmentation in 3d confocal microscopy images. *CoRR*, abs/1810.06933.

[Estrada et al., 2004] Estrada, F. J., Jepson, A. D., and Chennubhotla, C. (2004). Spectral embedding and min cut for image segmentation. In *Bmvc*, pages 1-10.

[Etter et al., 2011] Etter, B., Tilley, E., Khadka, R., and Udert, K. M. (2011). Low-cost struvite production using source-separated urine in nepal. *Water research*, 45(2):852-862.

[Fahlgren et al., 2015] Fahlgren, N., Feldman, M., Gehan, M. A., Wilson, M. S., Shyu, C., Bryant, D. W., Hill, S. T., McEntee, C. J., Warnasooriya, S. N., Kumar, I., et al. (2015). A versatile phenotyping system and analytics platform reveals diver²e temporal responses to water availability in setaria. *Molecular plant*, 8(10):1520-1535.

[Fawakherji et al., 2019] Fawakherji, M., Potena, C., Bloisi, D., Imperoli, M., Pretto, A., and Nardi, D. (2019). *UAV Image Based Crop and Weed Distribution Estimation on Embedded GPU Boards*, pages 100-108.

[Fawcett, 2006] Fawcett, T. (2006). An introduction to roc analysis. *Pattern Recognition Letters*, 27(8):861-874. ROC Analysis in Pattern Recognition.

[Federau, 2016] Federau, A. (2016). *Philosophie de l'Anthropocène : interprétations et épisté-mologie*. PhD thesis, éditeur non identifié.

[Finlayson et al., 2015] Finlayson, G. D., Mackiewicz, M., and Hurlbert, A. (2015). Color correction using root-polynomial regression. *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, 24(5):1460-1470.
[Fischler and Bolles, 1981] Fischler, M. A. and Bolles, R. C. (1981). Random sample consensus : A paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. *Commun. ACM*, 24(6):381-395.

[Fournier, 2011] Fournier, A. (2011). *Influence de la structure des couverts végétaux en télédétection de la fluorescence chlorophyllienne*. Theses, Ecole Polytechnique X.

[Fu et al., 2018] Fu, T., Ma, L., Li, M., and Johnson, B. A. (2018). Using convolutional neural network to identify irregular segmentation objects from very high-resolution remote sensing imagery. *Journal of Applied Remote Sensing*, 12(2):1-21.

[Fukuoka, 1983] Fukuoka, M. (1983). La révolution d'un seul brin de paille. *Guy Trédaniel Editions, Paris*.

[Gaetano et al., 2018] Gaetano, R., Ienco, D., Ose, K., and Cresson, R. (2018). A Two-Branch CNN Architecture for Land Cover Classification of PAN and MS Imagery. *Remote Sensing*, 10(11):1746.

[Galo et al., 2006] Galo, M., Hasegawa, J., Tommaselli, A., and Imai, N. (2006). Registration analysis and inner calibration of a three ccd multispectral frame camera. In *EUROCOW 2006 INTERNATIONAL CALIBRATION AND ORIENTATION WORKSHOP*, volume 25, page 27.

[Gao et al., 2018] Gao, J., Liao, W., Nuyttens, D., Lootens, P., Vangeyte, J., Pižurica, A., He, Y., and Pieters, J. G. (2018). Fusion of pixel and object-based features for weed mapping using unmanned aerial vehicle imagery. *International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation*, 67:43-53.

[Gao et al., 2013] Gao, L., Li, D., and Zhang, Y. (2013). Research of weeds classification system based on shape feature. *J. Softw.*, 8:1736-1742.

[Gao et al., 2016] Gao, Z., Wang, L., Zhou, L., and Zhang, J. (2016). Hep-2 cell image classification with deep convolutional neural networks. *IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics*, 21(2):416-428.

[Gay and Wery, 2003] Gay, F. and Wery, J. (2003). Elaboration d'indicateurs pour l'évaluation des risques de pollution nitrique et de l'impact de stress hydrique sur le rendement en cultures irriguées : application au cas de la laitue sur le périmètre des sources perrier.

[Gehan et al., 2017] Gehan, M. A., Fahlgren, N., Abbasi, A., Berry, J. C., Callen, S. T., Chavez, L., Doust, A. N., Feldman, M. J., Gilbert, K. B., Hodge, J. G., et al. (2017). Plantcv v2 : Image analysis software for high-throughput plant phenotyping. *PeerJ*, 5:e4088.

[Geiger et al., 2010] Geiger, F., Bengtsson, J., Berendse, F., Weisser, W. W., Emmerson, M., Morales, M. B., Ceryngier, P., Liira, J., Tscharntke, T., Winqvist, C., Eggers, S., Bommarco, R., Pärt, T., Bretagnolle, V., Plantegenest, M., Clement, L. W., Dennis, C., Palmer, C., Oñate, J. J., Guerrero, I., Hawro, V., Aavik, T., Thies, C., Flohre, A., Hänke, S., Fischer, C., Goedhart, P. W., and Inchausti, P. (2010). Persistent negative effects of pesticides on bio-diversity and biological control potential on european farmland. *Basic and Applied Ecology*, 11(2):97-105.

[Geusebroek et al., 2000] Geusebroek, J.-M., van den Boomgaard, R., Smeulders, A., and Dev, A. (2000). Color and scale : The spatial structure of color images. pages 331-341.

[Gilliot et al., 2018] Gilliot, J.-M., Michelin, J., Faroux, R., Domenzain, L. M., and Fallet, C. (2018). Correction of in-flight luminosity variations in multispectral UAS images, using a luminosity sensor and camera pair for improved biomass estimation in precision agriculture.
In *Conference on Autonomous Air and Ground Sensing Systems for Agricultural Optimization and Phenotyping!!!*, Autonomous Air and Ground Sensing Systems for Agricultural Optimization and Phenotyping III.

[Girshick, 2015] Girshick, R. (2015). Fast r-cnn. In *Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision*, pages 1440–1448.

[Girshick et al., 2014] Girshick, R., Donahue, J., Darrell, T., and Malik, J. (2014). Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation. In *Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition*, pages 580–587.

[Gitelson, 2004] Gitelson, A. A. (2004). Wide dynamic range vegetation index for remote quantification of biophysical characteristics of vegetation. *Journal of plant physiology*, 161(2):165–173.

[Godde et al., 2021] Godde, C., Mason-D'Croz, D., Mayberry, D., Thornton, P., and Herrero, M. (2021). Impacts of climate change on the livestock food supply chain; a review of the evidence. *Global Food Security*, 28:100488.

[Gomes and Zheng, 2020] Gomes, D. P. S. and Zheng, L. (2020). Leaf segmentation and counting with deep learning: an overview. In *VISAPP*.

[Göring et al., 2012] Göring, C., Fröhlich, B., and Denzler, J. (2012). Semantic segmentation using grabcut. In *VISAPP*.

[Green et al., 2021] Green, A. G., Abdulai, A.-R., Duncan, E., Glaros, A., Campbell, M., Newell, R., Quarshie, P., KC, K. B., Newman, L., Nost, E., and Fraser, E. D. G. (2021). A scoping review of the digital agricultural revolution and ecosystem services: implications for Canadian policy and research agendas. *FACETS*, 6:1955–1985.

[Griepentrog et al., 2005] Griepentrog, H. W., Nørremark, M., Nielsen, H., and Blackmore, S. (2005). Seed mapping of sugar beet. *Precision Agriculture*, 6:157–165.

[Grozinger and Flenniken, 2019] Grozinger, C. M. and Flenniken, M. L. (2019). Bee viruses: an overview of the ecology, pathogenicity, and impacts. *Annual review of entomology*, 64:205–226.

[Gutierrez Ortega et al., 2021] Gutierrez Ortega, J. A., Castillo, S. E., Gehan, M., and Fahlgren, N. (2021). Segmentation of overlapping plants in multi-plant image time series. *Earth and Space Science Open Archive*, page 5.

[Gée et al., 2021] Gée, C., Denimal, E., Merienne, J., and Larmure, A. (2021). Evaluation of weed impact on wheat biomass by combining visible imagery with a plant growth model: towards new non-destructive indicators for weed competition. *Precision Agriculture*, 22:1–19.

[Haan et al., 2021] Haan, N. L., Iuliano, B. G., Gratton, C., and Landis, D. A. (2021). Designing agricultural landscapes for arthropod-based ecosystem services in north america. In *Advances in Ecological Research*, volume 64, pages 191–250. Elsevier.

[Hafiz and Bhat, 2020] Hafiz, A. M. and Bhat, G. M. (2020). A survey on instance segmentation: state of the art. *International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval*, 9(3):171–189.

[Hao et al., 2014] Hao, Y., Dongyan, Z., Linsheng, H., and Jinling, Z. (2014). Wavelet-based threshold denoising for imaging hyperspectral data. *International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering*, 7(3):36–42.

[Harris et al., 1988] Harris, C., Stephens, M., et al. (1988). A combined corner and edge detector. In *Alvey vision conference*, volume 15, pages 10–5244. Citeseer.
[Hasan et al., 2021] Hasan, A. S. M., Sohel, F., Diepeveen, D., Laga, H., and Jones, M. (2021). A survey of deep learning techniques for weed detection from images. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 184:106067.

[Hassanein et al., 2018] Hassanein, M., Lari, Z., and El-Sheimy, N. (2018). A new vegetation segmentation approach for cropped fields based on threshold detection from hue histograms. *Sensors*, 18:1253.

[Henrich et al., 2009] Henrich, V., Götze, E., Jung, A., Sandow, C., Thürkow, D., and Gläßer, C. (2009). Development of an online indices database: Motivation, concept and implementation. In *Proceedings of the 6th EARSeL Imaging Spectroscopy SIG Workshop Innovative Tool for Scientific and Commercial Environment Applications, Tel Aviv, Israel*, pages 16–18.

[Hentschel and Page, 2003] Hentschel, M. L. and Page, N. W. (2003). Selection of descriptors for particle shape characterization. *Particle & Particle Systems Characterization: Measurement and Description of Particle Properties and Behavior in Powders and Other Disperse Systems*, 20(1):25–38.

[Herrington, 2021] Herrington, G. (2021). Update to limits to growth: Comparing the world3 model with empirical data. *Journal of Industrial Ecology*, 25(3):614–626.

[Herrmann et al., 2013] Herrmann, I., Shapira, U., Kinast, S., Karnieli, A., and Bonfil, D. (2013). Ground-level hyperspectral imagery for detecting weeds in wheat fields. *Precision Agriculture*, 14.

[Hertel et al., 2020] Hertel, L., Collado, J., Sadowski, P., Ott, J., and Baldi, P. (2020). Sherpa: Robust hyperparameter optimization for machine learning. *SoftwareX*, 12:100591.

[Hinimbio, 2019] Hinimbio, T. P. (2019). *Réhabilitation de la fertilité des sols par usage des bioressources (Crotalaria juncea L. et Brachiaria ruziziensis G. & E.) en zone cotonnière de l'Extrême-Nord, Cameroun*. Theses, Université de Maroua (Cameroun).

[Holzer, 2011] Holzer, S. (2011). *Sepp Holzer's permaculture: a practical guide to small-scale, integrative farming and gardening*. Chelsea Green Publishing.

[Honkavaara and Khoramshahi, 2018] Honkavaara, E. and Khoramshahi, E. (2018). Radio-metric correction of close-range spectral image blocks captured using an unmanned aerial vehicle with a radiometric block adjustment. *Remote Sensing*, 10(2).

[Hossin and Sulaiman, 2015] Hossin, M. and Sulaiman, M. N. (2015). A review on evaluation metrics for data classification evaluations. *International journal of data mining & knowledge management process*, 5(2):1.

[Hu et al., 2020] Hu, K., Coleman, G., Zeng, S., Wang, Z., and Walsh, M. (2020). Graph weeds net: A graph-based deep learning method for weed recognition. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 174:105520.

[Hu et al., 2021] Hu, K., Wang, Z., Coleman, G., Bender, A., Yao, T., Zeng, S., Song, D., Schumann, A., and Walsh, M. (2021). Deep learning techniques for in-crop weed identification: A review. *arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.14872*.

[Hu, 1962] Hu, M.-K. (1962). Visual pattern recognition by moment invariants. *IRE transactions on information theory*, 8(2):179–187.

[Huang et al., 2016] Huang, G., Liu, Z., and Weinberger, K. Q. (2016). Densely connected convolutional networks. *CoRR*, abs/1608.06993.

[Ishak et al., 2009] Ishak, A., Hussain, A., and Mustafa, M. (2009). Weed image classification using gabor wavelet and gradient field distribution. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture - COMPUT ELECTRON AGRIC*, 66:53–61.
[Jacobsen et al., 2016] Jacobsen, J.-H., Gemert, J., Lou, Z., and Smeulders, A. (2016). Struc- tured receptive fields in cnns. pages 2610–2619.

[Jadon, 2020] Jadon, S. (2020). A survey of loss functions for semantic segmentation. In *2020 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (CIBCB)*, pages 1–7. IEEE.

[Jain and Healey, 1998] Jain, A. and Healey, G. (1998). A multiscale representation including opponent color features for texture recognition. *IEEE Transactions on Image Processing*, 7(1):124–128.

[Jain and Zongker, 1997] Jain, A. and Zongker, D. (1997). Feature selection : evaluation, appli- cation, and small sample performance. *IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence*, 19(2):153–158.

[Jancovici, 2017] Jancovici, J.-M. (2017). *L'avenir climatique-Quel temps ferons-nous ?* Média Diffusion.

[Jang and Son, 2019] Jang, S. and Son, Y. (2019). Empirical evaluation of activation functions and kernel initializers on deep reinforcement learning. In *2019 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC)*, pages 1140–1142.

[Jiang and Li, 2020] Jiang, Y. and Li, C. (2020). Convolutional neural networks for image- based high-throughput plant phenotyping : a review. *Plant Phenomics*, 2020.

[Jin et al., 2013] Jin, X.-l., Diao, W.-y., Xiao, C.-h., Wang, F.-y., Chen, B., Wang, K.-r., and Li, S.-k. (2013). Estimation of wheat agronomic parameters using new spectral indices. *PLOS ONE*, 8(8):e1–9.

[Jinru and Su, 2017] Jinru, X. and Su, B. (2017). Significant remote sensing vegetation indices : A review of developments and applications. *Journal of Sensors*, 2017:1–17.

[Jonathan Storkey, 2007] Jonathan Storkey, D. B. W. (2007). Mini-review managing arable weeds for biodiversity. *Pest Management Science*, (63):517–523.

[Jones, 2009] Jones, G. (2009). *Modélisation d'images agronomiques-application a la recon- naissance d'adventices par imagerie pour une pulvérisation localisée*. PhD thesis.

[Joshi et al., 2020] Joshi, E., Sasode, D. S., Singh, N., and Chouhan, N. (2020). Revolution of indian agriculture through drone technology. *Biotica Research Today*, 2(5 Spl.) :174–176.

[Jouan et al., 2022] Jouan, J., Jacquet, F., and Huyghe, C. (2022). La recherche pour une agriculture sans pesticides : un cadre disruptif aujourd'hui pour construire les solutions de demain. In *Zéro pesticide : un nouveau paradigme de recherche pour une agriculture durable*. Editions QUAE.

[Jung et al., 2019] Jung, H., Lodhi, B., and Kang, J. (2019). An automatic nuclei segmenta- tion method based on deep convolutional neural networks for histopathology images. *BMC Biomedical Engineering*, 1.

[Junior et al., 2019] Junior, J. D. D., Backes, A. R., and Escarpinati, M. C. (2019). Detection of control points for uav-multispectral sensed data registration through the combining of feature descriptors. In *VISIGRAPP*.

[Kabiri et al., 2011] Kabiri, P., Pandi, M., and Nejat, S. (2011). Ndvi optimization using genetic algorithm. pages 1–5.

[Kakamoukas et al., 2021] Kakamoukas, G., Sarigiannidis, P., Maropoulos, A., Lagkas, T., Za- ralis, K., and Karaiskou, C. (2021). Towards climate smart farming—a reference architecture for integrated farming systems. *Telecom*, 2(1):52–74.
[Kamilaris and Prenafeta-Boldú, 2018] Kamilaris, A. and Prenafeta-Boldú, F. X. (2018). Deep learning in agriculture : A survey. *Computers and electronics in agriculture*, 147:70-90.

[Kamnitsas et al., 2018] Kamnitsas, K., de Castro, D. C., Folgoc, L. L., Walker, I., Tanno, R., Rueckert, D., Glocker, B., Criminisi, A., and Nori, A. V. (2018). Semi-supervised learning via compact latent space clustering. *CoRR*, abs/1806.02679.

[Kamoun, 2019] Kamoun, E. (2019). Image registration : From sift to deep learning.

[Kan et al., 2020] Kan, Z.-R., Liu, Q.-Y., He, C., Jing, Z.-H., Virk, A. L., Qi, J.-Y., Zhao, X., and Zhang, H.-L. (2020). Responses of grain yield and water use efficiency of winter wheat to tillage in the north china plain. *Field Crops Research*, 249:107760.

[Keller, 2018] Keller, A. (2018). Conférence sur les risques d'effondrement et les chemins de la résilience territoriale.

[Khan et al., 2020] Khan, A., Ilyas, T., Umraiz, M., Mannan, Z. I., and Kim, H. (2020). Ced-net : crops and weeds segmentation for smart farming using a small cascaded encoder-decoder architecture. *Electronics*, 9(10):1602.

[Khanna et al., 2017] Khanna, R., Sa, I., Nieto, J., and Siegwart, R. (2017). On field radio-metric calibration for multispectral cameras. In *2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)*, pages 6503-6509.

[Khater et al., 2020] Khater, I., Nabi, I., and Hamarneh, G. (2020). A review of super-resolution single-molecule localization microscopy cluster analysis and quantification methods. *Patterns*, 1:100038.

[Kim and Cho, 2020] Kim, J. and Cho, J. (2020). Exploring a multimodal mixture-of-yolos framework for advanced real-time object detection. *Applied Sciences*, 10(2).

[Kisinyo et al., 2011] Kisinyo, P., Ng'etich, W., Othieno, C., Okalebo, J., and Opile, W. (2011). Épuisement du phosphore : les pays acp doivent-ils s'en préoccuper. *Quelles sont les perspectives attendues en matière de recherche et de politique*.

[Kokhan and Vostokov, 2020] Kokhan, S. and Vostokov, A. (2020). Using vegetative indices to quantify agricultural crop characteristics. *Journal of Ecological Engineering*, 21:120-127.

[Kolli et al., 2021] Kolli, M. K., Opp, C., and Groll, M. (2021). Estimation of soil erosion and sediment yield concentration across the kolleru lake catchment using gis. *Environmental Earth Sciences*, 80(4):1-14.

[Koot, 2014] Koot, B. T. (2014). *Weed detection with Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in agricultural systems*. PhD thesis, Wageningen University and Research Centre. Registration number : 891024465110.

[Korres et al., 2019] Korres, N. E., Burgos, N. R., Travlos, I., Vurro, M., Gitsopoulos, T. K., Varanasi, V. K., Duke, S. O., Kudsk, P., Brabham, C., Rouse, C. E., and Salas-Perez, R. (2019). Chapter six - new directions for integrated weed management : Modern technologies, tools and knowledge discovery. volume 155 of *Advances in Agronomy*, pages 243-319. Academic Press.

[Koyejo et al., 2014] Koyejo, O., Natarajan, N., Ravikumar, P., and Dhillon, I. S. (2014). Consistent binary classification with generalized performance metrics. In *NIPS*, volume 27, pages 2744-2752. Citeseer.

[Kudsk et al., 2020] Kudsk, P., Sønderskov, M., Bonin, L., Gonzalez-Andujar, J., Jensen, J. E., Melander, B., Moonen, A., Riemens, M., Sattin, M., Schaffner, U., and Storkey, J. (2020). Iwmpraise – an eu horizon 2020 project providing integrated weed management solutions to european farmers. *Outlooks on Pest Management*, 31:152-159.
[Kulikov et al., 2018] Kulikov, V., Yurchenko, V., and Lempitsky, V. (2018). Instance segmentation by deep coloring.

[Kumar and Domnic, 2018] Kumar, J. P. and Domnic, S. (2018). Image based plant phenotyping using graph based method and circular hough transform. *Journal of Information Science and Engineering*, 34:671-686.

[Kussul et al., 2017] Kussul, N., Lavreniuk, M., Skakun, S., and Shelestov, A. (2017). Deep learning classification of land cover and crop types using remote sensing data. *IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters*, 14:778-782.

[Lamarque et al., 2014] Lamarque, P., Meyfroidt, P., Nettier, B., and Lavorel, S. (2014). How ecosystem services knowledge and values influence farmers’ decision-making. *PLOS ONE*, 9(9):e1-16.

[Larese et al., 2014] Larese, M. G., Namías, R., Craviotto, R. M., Arango, M. R., Gallo, C., and Granitto, P. M. (2014). Automatic classification of legumes using leaf vein image features. *Pattern Recognit.*, 47:158-168.

[Lawler and Wood, 1966] Lawler, E. L. and Wood, D. E. (1966). Branch-and-bound methods : A survey. *Operations research*, 14(4):699-719.

[Lechenet et al., 2014] Lechenet, M., Bretagnolle, V., Bockstaller, C., Boissinot, F., Petit, M.-S., Petit, S., and Munier-Jolain, N. M. (2014). Reconciling pesticide reduction with economic and environmental sustainability in arable farming. *PLOS ONE*, 9(6):e1-10.

[Lee et al., 2021] Lee, K.-d., Ahn, H.-y., Ryu, J.-h., So, K.-h., and Na, S.-i. (2021). Comparison of reflectance and vegetation index changes by type of uav-mounted multi-spectral sensors. *Korean Journal of Remote Sensing*, 37(5_1):947-958.

[Lee et al., 2020] Lee, M.-K., Golzarian, M., and Kim, I. (2020). A new color index for vegetation segmentation and classification. *Precision Agriculture*.

[Lefloch, 2018] Lefloch, C. (2018). Une première approche analytique des services écosysté-miques des élevages en race créole bovine, caprine et porcine de guadeloupe. Master’s thesis, Ecole Supérieure d’Agro-Développement International (ISTOM), FRA, FRA.

[Lemtiri et al., 2016] Lemtiri, A., Degrune, F., Barbieux, S., Hiel, M.-P., Chélin, M., Parvin, N., Vandenbol, M., Francis, F., and Colinet, G. (2016). Crop residue management in arable cropping systems under temperate climate. part 1 : Soil biological and chemical (phosphorus and nitrogen) properties. a review. *Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et Environnement*.

[Léraud and Van Hove, 2019] Léraud, I. and Van Hove, P. (2019). *Algues vertes : L'histoire interdite*. Delcourt.

[Leutenegger et al., 2011] Leutenegger, S., Chli, M., and Siegwart, R. (2011). Brisk : Binary robust invariant scalable keypoints. In *2011 IEEE international conference on computer vision (ICCV)*, pages 2548-2555. Ieee.

[Lherbier, 2005] Lherbier, J. (2005). *Valorisation de l'information géographique en agriculture de précision*. PhD thesis.

[Li et al., 2021] Li, Y., Al-Sarayreh, M., Irie, K., Hackell, D., Bourdot, G., Reis, M. M., and Ghamkhar, K. (2021). Identification of weeds based on hyperspectral imaging and machine learning. *Frontiers in Plant Science*, 11:2324.

[Lin et al., 2014] Lin, B., Sun, Y., and Sanchez, J. (2014). Efficient vessel feature detection for endoscopic image analysis. *IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering*, 62.

[Liu et al., 2019] Liu, B., Li, R., Li, H., You, G., Yan, S., and Tong, Q. (2019). Crop/weed discrimination using a field imaging spectrometer system. *Sensors*, 19:5154.
[Liu et al., 2017] Liu, P., Shi, R., Zhang, C., Zeng, Y., Wang, J., Tao, Z., and Gao, W. (2017). Integrating multiple vegetation indices via an artificial neural network model for estimating the leaf chlorophyll content of spartina alterniflora under interspecies competition. *Environ-mental Monitoring and Assessment*, 189.

[Liu et al., 2018a] Liu, R., Lehman, J., Molino, P., Such, F. P., Frank, E., Sergeev, A., and Yosinski, J. (2018a). An intriguing failing of convolutional neural networks and the coordconv solution. *CoRR*, abs/1807.03247.

[Liu et al., 2015] Liu, W., Rabinovich, A., and Berg, A. C. (2015). Parsenet: Looking wider to see better. *CoRR*, abs/1506.04579.

[Liu et al., 2018b] Liu, X., Li, Z., Zhong, K., Chao, Y., Miraldo, P., and Shi, Y. (2018b). Generic distortion model for metrology under optical microscopes. *Optics and Lasers in Engineering*, 103:119–126.

[Liu et al., 2016] Liu, Z., Li, X., Luo, P., Loy, C. C., and Tang, X. (2016). Deep learning markov random field for semantic segmentation. *CoRR*, abs/1606.07230.

[Loiret, 2016] Loiret, R. (2016). *Le Bilan écologique. Mesurer la perturbation anthropogénique de l'Ecosphère et de la Biosphère (un bilan de l'Anthropocène)*. Caractériser les voies du Développement écologique des territoires. Theses, Université Paris-Saclay.

[Lombaert et al., 2012] Lombaert, H., Grady, L., Pennec, X., Ayache, N., and Cheriet, F. (2012). Spectral demons – image registration via global spectral correspondence. In Fitzgibbon, A., Lazebnik, S., Perona, P., Sato, Y., and Schmid, C., editors, *Computer Vision – ECCV 2012*, pages 30–44, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[López-Granados, 2011] López-Granados, F. (2011). Weed detection for site-specific weed management: mapping and real-time approaches. *Weed Research*, 51(1):1–11.

[Lottes et al., 2018] Lottes, P., Behley, J., Milioto, A., and Stachniss, C. (2018). Fully convolutional networks with sequential information for robust crop and weed detection in precision farming. *CoRR*, abs/1806.03412.

[Lottes et al., 2016] Lottes, P., Hoeferlin, M., Sander, S., Müter, M., Schulze, P., and Stachniss, L. C. (2016). An effective classification system for separating sugar beets and weeds for precision farming applications. In *2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)*, pages 5157–5163.

[Lottes and Stachniss, 2017] Lottes, P. and Stachniss, C. (2017). Semi-supervised online visual crop and weed classification in precision farming exploiting plant arrangement. In *2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)*, pages 5155–5161.

[Louargant, 2016] Louargant, M. (2016). *Proxidétection des adventices par imagerie aérienne : vers un service de gestion par drone*. PhD thesis. Thèse de doctorat dirigée par Gée, ChristelleVillette, SylvainJones, Gawain et Vigneau, Nathalie Instrumentation et informatique de l'image Dijon 2016.

[Louargant et al., 2018] Louargant, M., Jones, G., Faroux, R., Paoli, J.-N., Maillot, T., Gée, C., and Villette, S. (2018). Unsupervised classification algorithm for early weed detection in row-crops by combining spatial and spectral information. *Remote Sensing*, 10(5).

[Louargant et al., 2017] Louargant, M., Villette, S., Jones, G., Vigneau, N., Paoli, J., and Gée, C. (2017). Weed detection by uav : simulation of the impact of spectral mixing in multispectral images. *Precision Agriculture*, 18:1–20.
[Louime et al., 2017] Louime, C., Fortune, J., and Gervais, G. (2017). Sargassum invasion of coastal environments : a growing concern. *American Journal of Environmental Sciences*, 13(1):58-64.

[Lourgant, 2016] Lourgant, M. (2016). *Proxidétection des adventices par imagerie aérienne : Vers un service de gestion par drone*. PhD thesis, UNIVERSITE DE BOURGOGNE. Agroécologie, AgroSup Dijon, INRA.

[Lu et al., 2021] Lu, J., Cheng, D., Geng, C., Zhang, Z., Xiang, Y., and Hu, T. (2021). Combining plant height, canopy coverage and vegetation index from uav-based rgb images to estimate leaf nitrogen concentration of summer maize. *Biosystems Engineering*, 202:42-54.

[Lukac and Plataniotis, 2005] Lukac, R. and Plataniotis, K. (2005). Color filter arrays : design and performance analysis. *IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics*, 51(4):1260-1267.

[Lv et al., 2018] Lv, X., Ming, D., Lu, T., Zhou, K., Wang, M., and Bao, H. (2018). A new method for region-based majority voting cnns for very high resolution image classification. *Remote Sensing*, 10(12).

[Ma et al., 2019] Ma, X., Deng, X., Qi, L., Jiang, Y., Li, H., Wang, Y., and Xing, X. (2019). Fully convolutional network for rice seedling and weed image segmentation at the seedling stage in paddy fields. *PloS one*, 14(4):e0215676.

[Machleb et al., 2020] Machleb, J., Peteinatos, G. G., Kollenda, B. L., Andújar, D., and Gerhards, R. (2020). Sensor-based mechanical weed control : Present state and prospects. *Computers and electronics in agriculture*, 176:105638.

[Mair et al., 2010] Mair, E., Hager, G. D., Burschka, D., Suppa, M., and Hirzinger, G. (2010). Adaptive and generic corner detection based on the accelerated segment test. In *European conference on Computer vision*, pages 183-196. Springer.

[Manh et al., 2001] Manh, A.-G., Rabatel, G., Assemat, L., and Aldon, M.-J. (2001). Ae-automation and emerging technologies : Weed leaf image segmentation by deformable templates. *Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research*, 80(2):139-146.

[Martin et al., 2017] Martin, P., Pierre-Alain, A., Canovas, I., Cicille, P., F., D., Domergue, J.-M., Douguedroit, A., Grard, N., Kamara, S., Lopez, C., Morardet, S., and Sauvagnargues, S. (2017). Ph-martin-2017-et-al-jistee-1-2017.

[Martino, 1973] Martino, J. P. (1973). The limits to growth : A report for the club of rome's project on the predicament of mankind : Dennis l. meadows et al. universe books, new york. 1972, 205 pages, 6.50; paperback 2.75.

[Martos et al., 2021] Martos, V., Ahmad, A., Cartujo, P., and Ordoñez, J. (2021). Ensuring agricultural sustainability through remote sensing in the era of agriculture 5.0. *Applied Sciences*, 11(13).

[Maudouit and Rochoy, 2019] Maudouit, M. and Rochoy, M. (2019). Systematic review of the impact of chlordecone on human health in the french west indies. *Therapie*, 74(6):611-625.

[McAllister et al., 2021] McAllister, W., Whitman, J., Varghese, J., Davis, A., and Chowdhary, G. (2021). Agbots 3.0 : Adaptive weed growth prediction for mechanical weeding agbots. *IEEE Transactions on Robotics*, pages 1-13.

[McBratney et al., 2005] McBratney, A., Whelan, B., Ancev, T., and Bouma, J. (2005). Future directions of precision agriculture. *Precision agriculture*, 6(1):7-23.

[McGarigal, 1995] McGarigal, K. (1995). *FRAGSTATS : spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure*, volume 351. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.
[McLaughlin and Mineau, 1995] McLaughlin, A. and Mineau, P. (1995). The impact of agri-cultural practices on biodiversity. *Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment*, 55(3):201-212.

[Meadows et al., 1972] Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., and Behrens, W. W. (1972). The limits to growth. *New York*, 102:27.

[Mekhalfa and Yacef, 2021] Mekhalfa, F. and Yacef, F. (2021). Supervised learning for crop/weed classification based on color and texture features. *arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.10581*.

[Mell, 2018] Mell, P. (2018). Développement de méthodes de phénotypage haut débit basées sur l'analyse d'images pour le suivi de traits d'intérêts sur une collection d'ignames (D. alata) en Guadeloupe. Master's thesis, INRA, Centre Antilles-Guyanne, Domaine de Duclos, 97127 Petit-Bourg, Guadeloupe.

[Mercan and Alam, 2011] Mercan, S. and Alam, M. (2011). Anomaly detection in hyperspectral imagery using stable distribution. *Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering*, 8049.

[Mésini, 2006] Mésini, B. (2006). Préservation de la biodiversité et souveraineté alimentaire : réactivation des savoirs paysans et émergence des droits de la terre (2000-2005). *Le retour des paysans ? à l'heure du développement durable*, page 71.

[Mezera Jiří, 2019] Mezera Jiří, Lukas Vojtěch, E. J. S. V. (2019). Comparison of sentinel-2 and isaria winter wheat mapping for variable rate application of nitrogen fertilizers. *MendelNet*, pages 48-53.

[Miao et al., 2004] Miao, L., Qi, H., and Snyder, W. E. (2004). A generic method for generating multispectral filter arrays. In *2004 International Conference on Image Processing, 2004. ICIP'04.*, volume 5, pages 3343-3346. IEEE.

[Milioto et al., 2017] Milioto, A., Lottes, P., and Stachniss, C. (2017). Real-time semantic segmentation of crop and weed for precision agriculture robots leveraging background knowledge in cnns. *CoRR*, abs/1709.06764.

[Minařík et al., 2019] Minařík, R., Langhammer, J., and Hanuš, J. (2019). Radiometric and atmospheric corrections of multispectral mca camera for uav spectroscopy. *Remote Sensing*, 11(20).

[Modica and Zoboli, 2016] Modica, M. and Zoboli, R. (2016). Vulnerability, resilience, hazard, risk, damage, and loss : A socio-ecological framework for natural disaster analysis. *Web Ecology*, 16:59-62.

[Mondal et al., 2019] Mondal, R., Santra, S., and Chanda, B. (2019). Dense morphological network : An universal function approximator. *CoRR*, abs/1901.00109.

[Monteiro et al., 2019] Monteiro, A., Von Wangenheim, A., and Júnior, P. (2019). Weed mapping on aerial images - a systematic literature review. Technical Report IN-CoD.LAPIX.01.2019.E, Federal University of Santa Catarina.

[Moradi et al., 2019] Moradi, S., Ghelich-Oghli, M., Alizadehasl, A., Shiri, I., Oveisi, N., Oveisi, M., Maleki, M., and Dhooge, J. (2019). A novel deep learning based approach for left ventricle segmentation in echocardiography : Mfp-unet.

[Moré, 1978] Moré, J. J. (1978). The levenberg-marquardt algorithm : Implementation and theory. In Watson, G., editor, *Numerical Analysis*, volume 630 of *Lecture Notes in Mathematics*, pages 105-116. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[Morison et al., 2008] Morison, M., Guichard, L., and Jeuffroy, M.-H. (2008). Comment maîtriser la flore adventice des grandes cultures à travers les éléments de l'itinéraire technique ? *Innovations agronomiques*, 3:27-41.
[Morris, 2018] Morris, D. D. (2018). A pyramid CNN for dense-leaves segmentation. volume abs/1804.01646.

[Mostajer Kheirkhah and Asghari, 2019] Mostajer Kheirkhah, F. and Asghari, H. (2019). Plant leaf classification using gist texture features. *IET Computer Vision*, 13(4):369–375.

[Nagaraj, 2008] Nagaraj, K. (2008). *Farmers' suicides in India : Magnitudes, trends and spatial patterns*. Bharathi puthakalayam.

[Némery et al., 2016] Némery, J., Gratiot, N., Doan, P., Duvert, C., Alvarado-Villanueva, R., and Duwig, C. (2016). Carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment sources and retention in a small eutrophic tropical reservoir. *Aquatic sciences*, 78(1):171–189.

[Nguy-Robertson et al., 2012] Nguyen-Robertson, A., Gitelson, A., Peng, Y., Viña, A., Arkebauer, T., and Rundquist, D. (2012). Green leaf area index estimation in maize and soybean : Combining vegetation indices to achieve maximal sensitivity. *Agronomy Journal*, 104:1336–1347.

[Nicholson et al., 2019] Nicholson, C. F., Stephens, E., Jones, A. D., Kopainsky, B., Parsons, D., and Garrett, J. H. (2019). Setting priorities to address the research gaps between agricultural systems analysis and food security outcomes in low-and middle-income countries.

[Nimier-David et al., 2019] Nimier-David, M., Vicini, D., Zeltner, T., and Jakob, W. (2019). Mitsuba 2 : A retargetable forward and inverse renderer. *Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH Asia)*, 38(6).

[Niu et al., 2021] Niu, C., Phinn, S., and Roelfsema, C. (2021). Global sensitivity analysis for canopy reflectance and vegetation indices of mangroves. *Remote Sensing*, 13(13).

[Nougadère et al., 2015] Nougadère, A., Réty, J., Vial, G., Volatier, J.-L., Leblanc, J.-C., Merlo, M., and Gerault, F. (2015). Surveillance des expositions alimentaires aux résidus de pesticides : des indicateurs de risque pour le suivi et l'orientation des programmes nationaux de surveillance et du plan ecophyto. *Bulletin Epidémiologique, Santé Animale et Alimentation*, 68.

[Nwankpa et al., 2018] Nwankpa, C., Ijomah, W., Gachagan, A., and Marshall, S. (2018). Activation functions : Comparison of trends in practice and research for deep learning.

[Oldeland et al., 2010] Oldeland, J., Dorigo, W., Lieckfeld, L., Lucieer, A., and Jürgens, N. (2010). Combining vegetation indices, constrained ordination and fuzzy classification for mapping semi-natural vegetation units from hyperspectral imagery. *Remote Sensing of Environment*, 114(6):1155–1166.

[Omari et al., 2020] Omari, M., Lee, J., Faqeerzada, M. A., Park, E., and Cho, B.-K. (2020). Digital image-based plant phenotyping : a review.

[Ordonez et al., 2018] Ordonez, A., Arguello, F., and Heras, D. B. (2018). Alignment of hyperspectral images using kaze features. *Remote Sensing*, 10(5).

[Osco et al., 2021] Osco, L. P., Marcato Junior, J., Marques Ramos, A. P., de Castro Jorge, L. A., Fatholahi, S. N., de Andrade Silva, J., Matsubara, E. T., Pistori, H., Gonçalves, W. N., and Li, J. (2021). A review on deep learning in uav remote sensing. *International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation*, 102:102456.

[Osorio et al., 2020] Osorio, K., Puerto, A., Pedraza, C., Jamaica, D., and Rodríguez, L. (2020). A deep learning approach for weed detection in lettuce crops using multispectral images. *AgriEngineering*, 2(3):471–488.

[Palanisamy et al., 2019] Palanisamy, S., Selvaraj, R., Ramesh, T., and Ponnusamy, J. (2019). Applications of remote sensing in agriculture - a review. *International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences*, 8:2270–2283.
[Pandey et al., 2017] Pandey, P., Irulappan, V., Bagavathiannan, M. V., and Senthil-Kumar, M. (2017). Impact of combined abiotic and biotic stresses on plant growth and avenues for crop improvement by exploiting physio-morphological traits. *Frontiers in plant science*, 8:537.

[Pape and Klukas, 2015] Pape, J.-M. and Klukas, C. (2015). 3-d histogram-based segmentation and leaf detection for rosette plants. In Agapito, L., Bronstein, M. M., and Rother, C., editors, *Computer Vision - ECCV 2014 Workshops*, pages 61–74, Cham. Springer International Publishing.

[Pászto et al., 2015] Pászto, V., Brychtová, A., and Marek, L. (2015). On shape metrics in cartographic generalization: A case study of the building footprint geometry. In *Modern Trends in Cartography*, pages 397–407. Springer.

[Pedregosa et al., 2011] Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., and Duchesnay, E. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine learning in python. *Journal of Machine Learning Research*, 12:2825–2830.

[Pelosi, 2008] Pelosi, C. (2008). *Modélisation de la dynamique d'une population de vers de terre Lumbricus terrestris au champ. Contribution à l'étude de l'impact des systèmes de culture sur les communautés lombriciennes*. PhD thesis, AgroParisTech.

[Perez-Ruiz et al., 2021] Perez-Ruiz, M., Martínez-Guanter, J., and Upadhyaya, S. K. (2021). Chapter 15 - high-precision gnss for agricultural operations. In p. Petropoulos, G. and Srivastava, P. K., editors, *GPS and GNSS Technology in Geosciences*, pages 299–335. Elsevier.

[Perez-Sanz et al., 2017] Perez-Sanz, F., Navarro, P. J., and Egea-Cortines, M. (2017). Plant phenomics: an overview of image acquisition technologies and image data analysis algorithms. *GigaScience*, 6(11). gix092.

[Perrette, 2018] Perrette, J. (2018). Services écosystémiques de l'élevage en guadeloupe: approche exploratoire. Master's thesis, Supagro/INRA; INRA; Unité de Recherches Zootechniques (URZ).

[Perrier-Bruslé et al., 2013] Perrier-Bruslé, L. et al. (2013). L'anthropocène et ses victimes. une réflexion terminologique, la géopolitique de l'arctique: sous le signe de la coopération, les régimes internationaux de l'environnement, la tragédie des communaux, «soft power». sens et usages d'un concept incertain, le retour de la revendication maritime bolivienne, la remise en cause des accords de schengen, frontières maritimes dans l'arctique: le droit de la mer est-il un cadre applicable?, les enjeux politiques autour des frontières maritimes.

[Perumal and Bhaskaran, 2010] Perumal, K. and Bhaskaran, R. (2010). Supervised classification performance of multispectral images. *CoRR*, abs/1002.4046.

[Pesce et al., 2021] Pesce, S., Mamy, L., Achard, A. L., Le Gall, M., Le Perchec, S., Rechau- chère, O., Tibi, A., Leenhardt, S., and Sanchez, W. (2021). Scientific literature survey: impacts of pesticides on biodiversity and ecosystem services. *Environmental Science and Pollution Research*, page 7 p.

[Peteinatos et al., 2020] Peteinatos, G. G., Reichel, P., Karouta, J., Andújar, D., and Gerhards, R. (2020). Weed identification in maize, sunflower, and potatoes with the aid of convolutional neural networks. *Remote Sensing*, 12(24).

[Peterson, 2009] Peterson, L. E. (2009). K-nearest neighbor. *Scholarpedia*, 4(2):1883.

[Peña-Barragán et al., 2011] Peña-Barragán, J. M., Ngugi, M. K., Plant, R. E., and Six, J. (2011). Object-based crop identification using multiple vegetation indices, textural features and crop phenology. *Remote Sensing of Environment*, 115(6):1301–1316.
[Pic et al., 2022] Pic, J., Cossart, E., and Fressard, M. (2022). Mais où va donc toute cette terre ? transferts sédimentaires & structure spatiale des réseaux de drainage sur les versants du beaujolais viticole. In *Théo Quant-Nouvelles approches en Géographie Théorique et Quantitative*.

[Pic et al., 2020] Pic, J., Le Guen, Y., Cossart, E., and Fressard, M. (2020). La dynamique d'enfrichement, ses expressions paysagères et ses significations : le cas du Beaujolais viticole. *VertigO : La Revue Électronique en Sciences de l'Environnement*.

[Piedallu et al., 2019] Piedallu, C., Chéret, V., Denux, J., Perez, V., Azcona, J., Seynave, I., and Gégout, J. (2019). Soil and climate differently impact ndvi patterns according to the season and the stand type. *Science of The Total Environment*, 651:2874-2885.

[Pierce and Nowak, 1999] Pierce, F. J. and Nowak, P. (1999). Aspects of precision agriculture. *Advances in agronomy*, 67:1-85.

[Pretto et al., 2019] Pretto, A., Aravecchia, S., Burgard, W., Chebrolu, N., Dornhege, C., Falck, T., Fleckenstein, F., Fontenla, A., Imperoli, M., Khanna, R., Liebisch, F., Lottes, P., Milioto, A., Nardi, D., Nardi, S., Pfeifer, J., Popovic, M., Potena, C., Pradalier, C., and Nieto, J. (2019). Building an aerial-ground robotics system for precision farming.

[Pujol, 2014] Pujol, J.-L. (2014). Journée mondiale des sols.

[Pérez et al., 2000] Pérez, A., López, F., Benlloch, J., and Christensen, S. (2000). Colour and shape analysis techniques for weed detection in cereal fields. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 25(3):197-212.

[Qiu et al., 2018] Qiu, R., Wei, S., Zhang, M., Li, H., Sun, H., Liu, G., and Li, M. (2018). Sensors for measuring plant phenotyping: A review. *International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering*, 11(2):1-17.

[Qiu and Yuille, 2016] Qiu, W. and Yuille, A. (2016). Unrealcv: Connecting computer vision to unreal engine. In *European Conference on Computer Vision*, pages 909-916. Springer.

[Quan et al., 2021] Quan, L., Li, H., Li, H., Jiang, W., Lou, Z., and Chen, L. (2021). Two-stream dense feature fusion network based on rgb-d data for the real-time prediction of weed aboveground fresh weight in a field environment. *Remote Sensing*, 13(12).

[Rabatel and Labbe, 2016] Rabatel, G. and Labbe, S. (2016). Registration of visible and near infrared unmanned aerialvehicle images based on Fourier-Mellin transform. *Precision Agriculture*, 17(5):564-587.

[Rahman and Wang, 2016] Rahman, M. and Wang, Y. (2016). Optimizing intersection-over-union in deep neural networks for image segmentation. In *International symposium on visual computing*, volume 10072, pages 234-244. Springer.

[Rasti et al., 2019] Rasti, P., Ahmad, A., Samiei, S., Belin, E., and Rousseau, D. (2019). Supervised image classification by scattering transform with application to weed detection in culture crops of high density. *Remote Sensing*, 11(3).

[Rathi and Goyal, 2021] Rathi, V. and Goyal, P. (2021). Convolution filter based efficient multispectral image demosaicking for compact msfas. In *VISIGRAPP (4 : VISAPP)*, pages 112-121.

[Rechid et al., 2011] Rechid, N., Khelifa, A., Toumi, A., TALEB-AHMED, A., Mimi, M., and Benmahammed, K. (2011). Segmentation non supervisée d'images basée sur les modèles de markov cachés. *Courrier de savoir, No12*, pages 39-34.

[Reedha et al., 2021] Reedha, R., Dericquebourg, E., Canals, R., and Hafiane, A. (2021). Vision transformers for weeds and crops classification of high resolution uav images. *arXiv e-prints*, pages arXiv-2109.
[Regnier et al., 2021] Regnier, R., Avrin, G., Barbosa, V., Boffety, D., Kalouguine, A., and Lardy-Fontan, S. (2021). Validation de méthodologies d'évaluation de solutions de désher-bage autonomes, dans le cadre des projets Challenge ROSE et METRICS. *Revue Ouverte d'Intelligence Artificielle*, 2(1):11-32.

[Reulier, 2015] Reulier, R. (2015). *Structure paysagère et dynamiques spatiales des transferts hydro-sédimentaires. Approche par simulation multi-agents*. Theses, Université de Caen Normandie.

[Rhouma et al., 2017] Rhouma, M. B. H., Žunić, J., and Younis, M. C. (2017). Moment invariants for multi-component shapes with applications to leaf classification. *Computers and electronics in agriculture*, 142:326-337.

[Robert, 2002] Robert, P. C. (2002). Precision agriculture : a challenge for crop nutrition management. In *Progress in Plant Nutrition : Plenary Lectures of the XIV International Plant Nutrition Colloquium*, pages 143-149. Springer.

[Roberts et al., 1982] Roberts, H., Chancellor, R., and Hill, T. (1982). Weed control handbook : Principles, ed. by ha roberts.

[Rojas et al., 2017] Rojas, C., Guzmán, L., and Velasco Toledo, N. (2017). Weed recognition by svm texture feature classification in outdoor vegetable crop images. *Ingeniería e Investigación*, 37:68.

[Rosenblatt, 1958] Rosenblatt, F. (1958). The perceptron : a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. *Psychological review*, 65(6):386.

[R.S and Palanisamy, 2010] R.S, D. and Palanisamy, V. (2010). Crop and weed discrimination in agricultural field using mrcsf. *International Journal of Signal and Imaging Systems Engineering*, 3.

[Rublee et al., 2011] Rublee, E., Rabaud, V., Konolige, K., and Bradski, G. (2011). Orb : An efficient alternative to sift or surf. In *Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Computer Vision*, ICCV '11, pages 2564-2571, Washington, DC, USA. IEEE Computer Society.

[Sa et al., 2017] Sa, I., Chen, Z., Popovic, M., Khanna, R., Liebisch, F., Nieto, J., and Siegwart, R. (2017). Weednet : Dense semantic weed classification using multispectral images and mav for smart farming. *IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters*, PP.

[Saddik et al., 2022] Saddik, A., Latif, R., El Ouardi, A., Elhoseny, M., and Khelifi, A. (2022). Computer development based embedded systems in precision agriculture : tools and application. *Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B—Soil & Plant Science*, pages 1-23.

[Sage and Unser, 2003] Sage, D. and Unser, M. (2003). Teaching image-processing programming in java. *IEEE Signal Processing Magazine*, 20(6):43-52. Using "Student-Friendly" ImageJ as a Pedagogical Tool.

[Saha et al., 2017] Saha, D., Hamer, G., and Lee, J. Y. (2017). Development of inter-leaves weed and plant regions identification algorithm using histogram of oriented gradient and k-means clustering. In *Proceedings of the International Conference on Research in Adaptive and Convergent Systems*, pages 136-139.

[Salisu Abubakar et al., 2021] Salisu Abubakar, B., Ahmad, A., Uba, H., Yakubu, M., and Ahmad, A. (2021). Systematic literature review and meta-analysis weed detection using machine learning : A systematic literature review. *Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis Journal*, 2.
[Salzenstein and Collet, 2006] Salzenstein, F. and Collet, C. (2006). Fuzzy markov random fields versus chains for multispectral image segmentation. *IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence*, 28:1753-1767.

[Sankaran et al., 2015] Sankaran, S., Khot, L. R., Espinoza, C. Z., Jarolmasjed, S., Sathuvalli, V. R., Vandemark, G. J., Miklas, P. N., Carter, A. H., Pumphrey, M. O., Knowles, N. R., and Pavek, M. J. (2015). Low-altitude, high-resolution aerial imaging systems for row and field crop phenotyping: A review. *European Journal of Agronomy*, 70:112–123.

[Scharr et al., 2016] Scharr, H., Minervini, M., French, A. P., Klukas, C., Kramer, D. M., Liu, X., Luengo, I., Pape, J.-M., Polder, G., Vukadinovic, D., et al. (2016). Leaf segmentation in plant phenotyping : a collation study. *Machine vision and applications*, 27(4):585-606.

[Scharr et al., 2017] Scharr, H., Pridmore, T., and Tsaftaris, S. (2017). Computer vision problems in plant phenotyping, cvppp 2017 : Introduction to the cvppp 2017 workshop papers. pages 2020-2021.

[Schaub, 2010] Schaub, C. (2010). Mieux connaître les mauvaises herbes pour mieux maîtriser le désherbage. *AgriMieux & Chambre d'Agriculture du Bas-Rhin*.

[Seitz, 2010] Seitz, H. (2010). Contributions to the minimum linear arrangement problem.

[Shamir et al., 2019] Shamir, R. R., Duchin, Y., Kim, J., Sapiro, G., and Harel, N. (2019). Continuous dice coefficient : a method for evaluating probabilistic segmentations. *CoRR*, abs/1906.11031.

[Shi et al., 1994] Shi, J. et al. (1994). Good features to track. In *1994 Proceedings of IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition*, pages 593–600. IEEE.

[Shishir and Tsuyuzaki, 2018] Shishir, S. and Tsuyuzaki, S. (2018). Hierarchical classification of land use types using multiple vegetation indices to measure the effects of urbanization. *Environmental Monitoring and Assessment*, 190.

[Shiva, 2005] Shiva, V. (2005). *Globalization's New Wars : Seed, Water & Life Forms*, volume 3. Women Unlimited.

[Shiva and Jalees, 2006] Shiva, V. and Jalees, K. (2006). *Seeds of suicide : the ecological and human costs of seed monopolies and globalisation of agriculture*. Navdanya.

[Singh et al., 2022] Singh, N., Tewari, V., Biswas, P., Dhruw, L., Pareek, C., and Singh, H. D. (2022). Semantic segmentation of in-field cotton bolls from the sky using deep convolutional neural networks. *Smart Agricultural Technology*, 2:100045.

[Storkey et al., 2021] Storkey, J., Helps, J., Hull, R., Milne, A. E., and Metcalfe, H. (2021). Defining integrated weed management : A novel conceptual framework for models. *Agronomy*, 11(4).

[Su, 2020] Su, W.-H. (2020). Advanced machine learning in point spectroscopy, rgb- and hyperspectral-imaging for automatic discriminations of crops and weeds : A review. *Smart Cities*, 3(3):767-792.

[Sun et al., 2018] Sun, H., Hou, M., Yang, Y., Zhang, T., Weng, F., and Han, F. (2018). Solving partial differential equation based on bernstein neural network and extreme learning machine algorithm. *Neural Processing Letters*, pages 1-20.

[Suta et al., 2012] Suta, L., Bessy, F., Veja, C., and Vaida, M. (2012). Active contours : Application to plant recognition. pages 181-187.

[Tan et al., 2014] Tan, X., Lai, S., Liu, Y., and Zhang, M. (2014). Green channel guiding denoising on bayer image. *The Scientific World Journal*, 2014.
[Tang et al., 2021] Tang, Y., Dananjayan, S., Hou, C., Guo, Q., Luo, S., and He, Y. (2021). A survey on the 5g network and its impact on agriculture : Challenges and opportunities. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 180:105895.

[Tanrıverdi et al., 2020] Tanrıverdi, C., Fakültesi, Z., Yapılar, T., Bölümü, S., Kahramanmaraş, Tarımda, H., Algılama, U., İndekslerinin, B., and Derlemesi, B. (2020). A review of remote sensing and vegetation indices in precision farming.

[Tareen and Saleem, 2018] Tareen, S. A. K. and Saleem, Z. (2018). A comparative analysis of sift, surf, kaze, akaze, orb, and brisk. *2018 International Conference on Computing, Mathematics and Engineering Technologies (iCoMET)*, pages 1–10.

[Taylor and Whelan, 2005] Taylor, J. and Whelan, B. (2005). A general introduction to precision agriculture. *Australian Center for Precision Agriculture*.

[Tharwat, 2020] Tharwat, A. (2020). Classification assessment methods. *Applied Computing and Informatics*.

[Thyagharajan and Raji, 2019] Thyagharajan, K. and Raji, I. K. (2019). A review of visual descriptors and classification techniques used in leaf species identification. *Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering*, 26(4):933–960.

[Tian et al., 2020] Tian, C., Fei, L., Zheng, W., Xu, Y., Zuo, W., and Lin, C.-W. (2020). Deep learning on image denoising : An overview. *Neural Networks*.

[Tournebize, 2020] Tournebize, J. (2020). *L'ingénierie écologique au service de la qualité de l'eau*. Habilitation à diriger des recherches, Sorobonne Université.

[Trajković and Hedley, 1998] Trajković, M. and Hedley, M. (1998). Fast corner detection. *Image and vision computing*, 16(2):75–87.

[Tripicchio et al., 2020] Tripicchio, P., Camacho-Gonzalez, G., and D'Avella, S. (2020). Welding defect detection : Coping with artifacts in the production line. *The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology*, 111(5):1659–1669.

[Tsolakidis et al., 2014] Tsolakidis, D. G., Kosmopoulos, D. I., and Papadourakis, G. (2014). Plant leaf recognition using zernike moments and histogram of oriented gradients. In *Hellenic conference on artificial intelligence*, pages 406–417. Springer.

[Uchiyama et al., 2017] Uchiyama, H., Sakurai, S., Mishima, M., Arita, D., Okayasu, T., Shimada, A., and Taniguchi, R.-i. (2017). An easy-to-setup 3d phenotyping platform for komatsuna dataset. pages 2038–2045.

[Utyasheva et al., 2021] Utyasheva, L., Sharma, D., Ghimire, R., Karunarathne, A., Robertson, G., and Eddleston, M. (2021). Suicide by pesticide ingestion in nepal and the impact of pesticide regulation. *BMC public health*, 21(1):1–11.

[Vakalopoulou and Karantzalos, 2014] Vakalopoulou, M. and Karantzalos, K. (2014). Automatic descriptor-based co-registration of frame hyperspectral data. *Remote Sensing*, 6.

[van Beers et al., 2019] van Beers, F., Lindström, A., Okafor, E., and Wiering, M. A. (2019). Deep neural networks with intersection over union loss for binary image segmentation. In *ICPRAM*, pages 438–445.

[Van Der Werf, 1997] Van Der Werf, H. M. (1997). Evaluer l'impact des pesticides sur l'environnement. *Le Courrier de l'environnement de l'INRA*, 31(31):5–22.

[van Mourik et al., 2021] van Mourik, S., van der Tol, R., Linker, R., Reyes-Lastiri, D., Kootstra, G., Koerkamp, P. G., and van Henten, E. J. (2021). Introductory overview : Systems and control methods for operational management support in agricultural production systems. *Environmental Modelling & Software*, 139:105031.
[Vayssade, 2018] Vayssade, J.-A. (2018). Spatial tracking of small ruminants on pasture.

[Vayssade et al., 2019] Vayssade, J.-A., Arquet, R., and Bonneau, M. (2019). Automatic activity tracking of goats using drone camera. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 162:767-772.

[Vayssade et al., 2022] Vayssade, J.-A., Jones, G., Gée, C., and Paoli, J.-N. (2022). Pixelwise instance segmentation of leaves in dense foliage. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 195:1067-1079.

[Vayssade et al., 2020] Vayssade, J.-A., JONES, G., Paoli, J.-N., and Gée, C. (2020). Two-step multi-spectral registration via key-point detector and gradient similarity. Application to agronomic scenes for proxy-sensing. In *Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications*, La Valette, Malta.

[Vayssade et al., 2021] Vayssade, J.-A., Paoli, J.-N., Gée, C., and JONES, G. (2021). DeepIn-dices: Remote Sensing Indices Based on Approximation of Functions through Deep-Learning, Application to Uncalibrated Vegetation Images. *Remote Sensing*, 13(2261):1-21.

[Vioix, 2004] Vioix, J.-B. (2004). *Conception et réalisation d'un dispositif d'imagerie multispectrale embarqué: du capteur aux traitements pour la détection d'adventices*. PhD thesis. Thèse de doctorat dirigée par Truchetet, Frédéric et Douzals, Jean-Paul Informatique et instrumentation de l'image Dijon 2004.

[Vitinnov et al., 2017] Vitinnov, V. et al. (2017). Journées de l'agroécologie au vignoble.

[Vulgarakis Minov, 2015] Vulgarakis Minov, S. (2015). *Integration of imaging techniques for the quantitative characterization of pesticide sprays*. PhD thesis. Thèse de doctorat dirigée par Paindavoine, MichelPieters, JanCointault, Frédéric et Nuyttens, David Instrumentation et informatique de l'image Dijon 2015.

[Waghmare et al., 2016] Waghmare, H., Kokare, R., and Dandawate, Y. (2016). Detection and classification of diseases of grape plant using opposite colour local binary pattern feature and machine learning for automated decision support system. In *2016 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Integrated Networks (SPIN)*, pages 513-518.

[Wang et al., 2019a] Wang, A., Zhang, W., and Wei, X. (2019a). A review on weed detection using ground-based machine vision and image processing techniques. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 158:226-240.

[Wang et al., 2022] Wang, D., Cao, W., Zhang, F., Li, Z., Xu, S., and Wu, X. (2022). A review of deep learning in multiscale agricultural sensing. *Remote Sensing*, 14(3).

[Wang et al., 2019b] Wang, G., Wang, J., Zou, X., Chai, G., Wu, M., and Wang, Z. (2019b). Estimating the fractional cover of photosynthetic vegetation, non-photosynthetic vegetation and bare soil from modis data: Assessing the applicability of the ndvi-dfi model in the typical xilingol grasslands. *International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation*, 76:154-166.

[Wang et al., 2008] Wang, J., Shi, F., Zhang, J., and Liu, Y. (2008). A new calibration model of camera lens distortion. *Pattern Recogn.*, 41(2):607-615.

[Wang et al., 2018a] Wang, X., Singh, D., Marla, S., Morris, G., and Poland, J. (2018a). Field-based high-throughput phenotyping of plant height in sorghum using different sensing technologies. *Plant Methods*, 14:53.

[Wang et al., 2018b] Wang, Z., Wang, K., Yang, F., Pan, S., and Han, Y. (2018b). Image segmentation of overlapping leaves based on chan-vese model and sobel operator. *Information Processing in Agriculture*, 5(1):1-10.
[Ward and Moghadam, 2020] Ward, D. and Moghadam, P. (2020). Scalable learning for bridging the species gap in image-based plant phenotyping. *Computer Vision and Image Understanding*, 197-198:103009.

[Ward et al., 2018] Ward, D., Moghadam, P., and Hudson, N. (2018). Deep leaf segmentation using synthetic data. In *BMVC*.

[Watcharabutsarakham et al., 2012] Watcharabutsarakham, S., Sinthupinyo, W., and Kiratiratanapruk, K. (2012). Leaf classification using structure features and support vector machines. In *2012 6th International Conference on New Trends in Information Science, Service Science and Data Mining (ISSDM2012)*, pages 697-700. IEEE.

[Wesson and Wareing, 1967] Wesson, G. and Wareing, P. (1967). Light requirements of buried seeds. *Nature*, 213(5076):600-601.

[Wezel et al., 2014] Wezel, A., Casagrande, M., Celette, F., jean françois, V., Ferrer, A., and Peigné, J. (2014). Agroecological practices for sustainable agriculture. a review. *Agronomy for Sustainable Development*, 34:1-20.

[Wintermantel et al., 2020] Wintermantel, D., Odoux, J.-F., Decourtye, A., Henry, M., Allier, F., and Bretagnolle, V. (2020). Neonicotinoid-induced mortality risk for bees foraging on oilseed rape nectar persists despite eu moratorium. *Science of The Total Environment*, 704:135400.

[Wong et al., 2013] Wong, W., Ali, C., Brandon, K., Wee, C. C., and Marriapan, M. (2013). Co-occurrence matrix with neural network classifier for weed species classification: A comparison between direct application of co-occurrence matrix (glcm) and haralick features as inputs. *International Journal of Enhanced Research in Science and Engineering*, 2(2):1-6.

[Wood et al., 2020] Wood, T. J., Michez, D., Paxton, R. J., Drossart, M., Neumann, P., Gerard, M., Vanderplanck, M., Barraud, A., Martinet, B., Leclercq, N., et al. (2020). Managed honey bees as a radar for wild bee decline? *Apidologie*, 51(6):1100-1116.

[Wu et al., 2019] Wu, X., Aravecchia, S., and Pradalier, C. (2019). Design and implementation of computer vision based in-row weeding system. In *2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)*, pages 4218-4224.

[Wu et al., 2020] Wu, Y., Chen, L., and Merhof, D. (2020). Improving pixel embedding learning through intermediate distance regression supervision for instance segmentation. In *European Conference on Computer Vision*, pages 213-227. Springer.

[Wu et al., 2021a] Wu, Z., Chen, Y., Zhao, B., Kang, X., and Ding, Y. (2021a). Review of weed detection methods based on computer vision. *Sensors*, 21(11).

[Wu et al., 2021b] Wu, Z., Chen, Y., Zhao, B., Kang, X., and Ding, Y. (2021b). Review of weed detection methods based on computer vision. *Sensors*, 21(11).

[Xie et al., 2020] Xie, X., Chen, J., Li, Y., Shen, L., Ma, K., and Zheng, Y. (2020). Instance-aware self-supervised learning for nuclei segmentation.

[Xu et al., 2020] Xu, Y., He, R., Gao, Z., Li, C., Zhai, Y., and Jiao, Y. (2020). Weed density detection method based on absolute feature corner points in field. *Agronomy*, 10(1).

[Xue et al., 2017] Xue, Jinru, S., and Baofeng (2017). Significant Remote Sensing Vegetation Indices: A Review of Developments and Applications. *Journal of Sensors*, 10(1155):1-1.

[Yahui et al., 2019] Yahui, G., Senthilnath, J., Wu, W., Zhang, X., Zeng, Z., and Huang, H. (2019). Radiometric calibration for multispectral camera of different imaging conditions mounted on a uav platform. *Sustainability*, 11:1-24.
[You et al., 2020] You, J., Liu, W., and Lee, J. (2020). A dnn-based semantic segmentation for detecting weed and crop. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 178:105750.

[Yousefi et al., 2016] Yousefi, S., Pourghasemi, H. R., Hooke, J., Navratil, O., and Kidová, A. (2016). Changes in morphometric meander parameters identified on the karoon river, iran, using remote sensing data. *Geomorphology*, 271:55-64.

[Yuan et al., 2019] Yuan, T., Borba, W., Obraczka, K., Barakat, C., Turletti, T., Esteve Rothenberg, C., and da Rocha Neto, W. (2019). Harnessing machine learning for next-generation intelligent transportation systems: A survey.

[Yue et al., 2016] Yue, H., Cai, K., Lin, H., Man, H., and Zeng, Z. (2016). A markov random field model for image segmentation of rice planthopper in rice fields. *Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Review*, 9:31-38.

[Zamir et al., 2020] Zamir, S. W., Arora, A., Khan, S. H., Hayat, M., Khan, F. S., Yang, M., and Shao, L. (2020). Learning enriched features for real image restoration and enhancement. volume abs/2003.06792.

[Zerbib, 2018] Zerbib, J. (2018). *Relations trophiques ente la plante cultivée et les champignons mycorhiziens à arbuscules. Importance des champignons mycorhiziens à arbuscules sur la production végétale (en termes de quantité et qualité)*. PhD thesis, Bourgogne Franche-Comté. Thèse de doctorat dirigée par Wipf, Daniel Physiologie Bourgogne Franche-Comté 2018.

[Zhai et al., 2018] Zhai, H., Zhang, H., Zhang, L., and Li, P. (2018). Cloud/shadow detection based on spectral indices for multi/hyperspectral optical remote sensing imagery. *ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing*, 144:235-253.

[Zhang et al., 2017] Zhang, H., Lan, Y., Lacey, R. E., Hoffmann, W. C., Huang, Y., Panda, S. S., Ames, D. P., Panigrahi, S., Schweizer, S., Moura, J. M. F., Miglani, A., Roy, S. S., Min, Y., and Hua, M. (2017). Image processing techniques for vegetation study - retrospective.

[Zhang et al., 2016] Zhang, H., Wohlfeil, J., and Grießbach, D. (2016). Extension and evaluation of the agast feature detector.

[Zhang et al., 2015] Zhang, L., Sun, X., Wu, T., and Zhang, H. (2015). An analysis of shadow effects on spectral vegetation indexes using a ground-based imaging spectrometer. *IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters*, 12:1-5.

[Zhang et al., 2019a] Zhang, M. R., Lucas, J., Hinton, G. E., and Ba, J. (2019a). Lookahead optimizer: k steps forward, 1 step back. *CoRR*, abs/1907.08610.

[Zhang et al., 2019b] Zhang, S., Chen, H., Fu, Y., Niu, H., Yang, Y., and Zhang, B. (2019b). Fractional vegetation cover estimation of different vegetation types in the qaidam basin. *Sustainability*, 11(3).

[Zhang et al., 2020] Zhang, X., Barron, J. T., Tsai, Y.-T., Pandey, R., Zhang, X., Ng, R., and Jacobs, D. E. (2020). Portrait shadow manipulation. volume 39.

[Zhao et al., 2017] Zhao, H., Shi, J., Qi, X., Wang, X., and Jia, J. (2017). Pyramid scene parsing network.

[Zheng et al., 2019] Zheng, Y.-Y., Kong, J.-L., Jin, X.-B., Wang, X.-Y., Su, T.-L., and Zuo, M. (2019). Cropdeep: The crop vision dataset for deep-learning-based classification and detection in precision agriculture. *Sensors*, 19(5).

[Zhonghua et al., 2020] Zhonghua, M., Xiaoyao, Y., Meihong, X., Chuangxin, H., Nan, L., and Teng, S. (2020). Automatic weed detection method based on fusion of multiple image processing algorithms. *Smart Agriculture*, 2(4):103.
[Zhou et al., 2019] Zhou, D., Fang, J., Song, X., Guan, C., Yin, J., Dai, Y., and Yang, R. (2019). Iou loss for 2d/3d object detection.

[Zhou et al., 2014] Zhou, R., Kaneko, S., Tanaka, F., Kayamori, M., and Shimizu, M. (2014). Disease detection of cercospora leaf spot in sugar beet by robust template matching. *Computers and Electronics in Agriculture*, 108:58-70.

[Zhu, 2006] Zhu, X. (2006). Semi-supervised learning literature survey.

[Zitová and Flusser, 2003] Zitová, B. and Flusser, J. (2003). Image registration methods: A survey. *Image and Vision Computing*, 21:977-1000.

[Zuiderveld, 1994] Zuiderveld, K. (1994). Graphics gems iv. chapter Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization, pages 474-485. Academic Press Professional, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA.

[Zwiggelaar, 1998] Zwiggelaar, R. (1998). A review of spectral properties of plants and their potential use for crop/weed discrimination in row-crops. *Crop protection*, 17(3):189-206.