Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Accurate tomato instance segmentation in greenhouse scenes remains challenging because of fruit occlusion, instance contact, ambiguous boundaries, and the visual similarity between green fruits and leaves. This study presents a lightweight YOLO11n-seg framework that combines a morphology-based shape-boundary-driven (SBD) weighting strategy with the previously proposed CMPRD multi-scale context module. SBD constructs a narrow contour band for each ground-truth instance and increases the contribution of boundary pixels to the mask loss during training without altering the inference graph, whereas CMPRD replaces SPPF near the end of the YOLO11n-seg backbone to enhance multi-scale contextual representation. Across five independent runs on the 128-image validation split (mean ± standard deviation), the combined model increases Mask Recall from \(0.7656± 0.0046\) to \(0.7726± 0.0039\) and Mask mAP50–95 from \(0.6587± 0.0025\) to \(0.6812± 0.0026\) relative to YOLO11n-seg, while Mask Precision changes from \(0.7989± 0.0037\) to \(0.7961± 0.0035\) . In the fixed seed-0 comparison with additional baselines, the larger YOLOv8s-seg and YOLO11s-seg models achieve Mask mAP50–95 values of 0.69161 and 0.69434, respectively, whereas a literature-guided reimplementation of Enhanced YOLO11n-Seg achieves 0.67840 under a comparable lightweight computational budget. On the untouched 161-image official test set, the primary Mask mAP50–95 results, reported as the mean ± standard deviation across all five runs rather than the best-performing run, are \(0.6529± 0.0016\) for YOLO11n-seg and \(0.6782± 0.0016\) for the proposed model, corresponding to a mean gain of 0.0252 and a paired 95% confidence interval of [0.0227, 0.0277]. Among successfully matched instances with mask IoU \(≥ 0.5\) , Boundary IoU increases from \(0.612± 0.004\) to \(0.651± 0.003\) , and Boundary F-score increases from \(0.744± 0.003\) to \(0.779± 0.002\) . On the same validation split and seed-0 development run, a parameter/FLOP-matched convolutional control achieves a Mask mAP50–95 of 0.66530, compared with 0.67007 for CMPRD. The effects of spatial boundary weighting and overall mask-loss scaling are not isolated, and cross-dataset generalization remains unverified.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: