Sep 2026· International Conference on Mechatronics and Electronic Technology· Vol 14358, pp. 143580Z - 143580Z-8· 0 citations· 16 references
Engineering
TL;DR
RTMDet-AS is presented, a robust instance segmentation network tailored to address the challenges of cluttered backgrounds, dense fruit clusters, and the strict efficiencyaccuracy trade-off required for edge computing in unstructured greenhouses with a 96.7 FPS inference rate and fewer computational efforts.
Abstract
Automated robot harvesting is becoming more and more important for solving labor shortages and improving productivity in modern agriculture. However, due to the complex background, dense fruit clusters, and limited computing resources of edge devices, achieving reliable real-time visual perception in unstructured greenhouse environments remains a daunting challenge. This paper presents RTMDet-AS, a robust instance segmentation network tailored to address the challenges of cluttered backgrounds, dense fruit clusters, and the strict efficiencyaccuracy trade-off required for edge computing in unstructured greenhouses. Our architecture is based on the enhanced channel attention (ECA) network with the dual-pooling mechanism to make the feature responses adaptive, to suppress the irrelevant background information, and enhance the texture of fruits. SCYLLA-IoU (SIoU) loss was also introduced to replace Generalized IoU (GIoU) loss, because it uses angle-aware penalties to make regression oscillation in dense clusters confined and accelerate convergence. Furthermore, online data augmentation is introduced to help the model transfer knowledge from a static dataset to a dynamic harvesting task and bridge the domain gap. Moreover, experiments show that RTMDet-AS has Mask AP of 65.9% and Box AP of 67.3%, outperforming the industrial models’ standard YOLOv5s-seg by 2.9% and 1.2% respectively. With a 96.7 FPS inference rate and fewer computational efforts, the proposed model is a good model for real-time perception in agricultural robotics.
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The perception of the impact of agile methods is predominantly positive, and several challenge areas were discovered, but based on this study, agile methods are here to stay.
M. Laanti, O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· Information and Software Tec...· 260 citations· ⚡20
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 8, 2026
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.