arXiv AI

Can Edge-Deployable Vision-Language Models Identify Species?

arXiv:2609. 11916v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Camera traps often run in the field on edge hardware with limited or no connectivity, making small, locally-deployable vision-language models (VLMs) -- not frontier-scale ones -- the practically relevant class to evaluate for species identification.

arXiv AI
Jun 10

Democratising Camera Trap AI: An Open-Source Model for Detecting UK Mammals

arXiv:2606. 10940v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Camera traps have become a cornerstone of biodiversity monitoring, but the artificial intelligence that turns vast quantities of images into usable ecological data is often locked behind commercial platforms or trained on fauna that does not match that of the British Isles.

By Paul Fergus, Philip Stephens, Russell A. Hill, Lee Oliver, Katie Appleby, Sarah Beatham, Naomi Davies Walsh, Stuart Nixon, Naomi Matthews, Chris Sutherland, Kelly Hitchcock
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 9

Democratising Camera Trap AI: An Open-Source Model for Detecting UK Mammals

Camera traps have become a cornerstone of biodiversity monitoring, but the artificial intelligence that turns vast quantities of images into usable ecological data is often locked behind commercial platforms or trained on fauna that does not match that of the British Isles. In an attempt to remove barriers and increase uptake, we release an open-source object detection model for 31 classes, 28 common UK mammal and bird species, plus utility classes for humans, calibration poles, and vehicles, drawn from a curated dataset of 48,165 labelled instances assembled from multiple sites over a decade of operational deployment through Conservation AI and its successor, Trap Tracker.

arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 27

CropCop: An Auditable 120-Class Plant-Health Model from Benchmark Reconstruction to a Quantised Runtime Artifact

CropCop is a closed‑set plant‑health recognition system covering 120 operational classes, built from a rigorously audited dataset of 109,107 images after removing 3,233 duplicate relationships. The model, based on a fine‑tuned DINOv3 ConvNeXt‑Tiny, achieves 98.51% accuracy and 96.87% macro‑F1 on a locked internal test, while a quantised MobileNetV4 variant reaches 98.46% accuracy and 96.23% macro‑F1 in a 22.60 MiB runtime artifact. Validation‑only post‑training quantisation and a compact ExecuTorch/XNNPACK PTE ensure high fidelity between the trained model and its deployed form, with minimal decision changes between the INT8 graph and the final artifact.

By Rana Muhammad Ahmed, Sabahat Abbas
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 3

WildRoadBench: A Wild Aerial Road-Damage Grounding Benchmark for Vision-Language Models and Autonomous Agents

arXiv:2605. 20306v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We introduce WildRoadBench, a wild aerial road-damage grounding benchmark that couples direct visual grounding by vision-language models with autonomous research-and-engineering by LLM-driven agents on a single professionally annotated UAV corpus.

By Bingnan Liu, Chenhang Cui, Rui Huang, Jiani Luo, Zhirong Shen, Tinghao Wang, Xiande Huang, Lingbei Meng, Fei Shen, An Zhang
arXiv AI
Jul 29

Why Does Grounding Hurt Medical VQA? Benchmarking, Diagnosis, and Fine-Tuning of Vision-Language Models

arXiv:2604. 27720v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly applied to medical visual question answering (Med-VQA), yet whether they can \emph{localize} the evidence behind their answers---a prerequisite for clinical auditability---is poorly characterized.

By Xupeng Chen, Binbin Shi, Chenqian Le, Qifu Yin, Lang Lin, Haowei Ni, Ran Gong, Panfeng Li
arXiv AI
Aug 14

How Do VLMs Behave When Blind or Misled? Behavioral Evaluation of VLMs on Scientific Figures

arXiv:2608. 13267v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Existing vision-language model (VLM) benchmarks emphasize perception and reasoning accuracy (how well VLMs describe and reason about what they see in an image), with limited attention to behavioral reliability under uncertainty (how they behave when visual evidence is missing or misleading).

By Paul Osemudiame Oamen, Owusu-Banahene Osei, Ananya Mukherjee, Christian Greisinger, Steffen Eger, Pius Onobhayedo, Wei Zhao