The successful integration of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in precision agriculture provided farmers with the means to identify potential issues, such as early disease detection or pest infestations, by making crop-related predictions. The new technological developments in this field improve the functioning of traditional agriculture by reducing the dependence on specialized human expertise and facilitating greater access to diagnostic procedures. However, most studies conducted in this area rely on centralized training of AI models, which leads to increased costs and raised privacy-related concerns. Federated learning (FL) offers a compelling framework for collaboratively training machine learning (ML) models on distributed datasets without centralizing the data owned by each participant. FL offers significant advantages in the preservation of data privacy, facilitates the collaborative exploitation of geographically distributed data sources, and reduces the risks associated with centralized collection. In this paper, we investigate the current limitations and performance boundaries of existing Federated and privacy-preserving learning in distributed sensing systems for plant disease detection, in scenarios that closely resemble real-world conditions. Our analysis specifically examined how FL aggregation algorithms, such as FedAvg, FedAvgM and FedProx, work in a custom multi-client experimental setup where data is partitioned so that each participant observes only those symptom patterns associated with specific environmental and climatic conditions. We propose further partial aggregation of the local model, an approach where we send only the model backbone to the central server, while the classification head of each participant remains strictly on the client side. The construction of environmentally heterogeneity is combined with a globally representative stabilizer node designed to preserve knowledge across disease classes that may be absent from certain clients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cristea et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: