AU702189B2 - Method for identifying miscellaneous objects, species or items, and uses thereof - Google Patents

Description

flowers, or of the ligneous creeper type, or even bushes and shrubs, etc. If, for example, the species is a tree, which may be difficult to identify if the plant has just germinated, it is necessary to reply, for example, to questions such as: carrying cones or carrying catkins; it is then necessary to identify whether the leaves are narrow and acicular or, for example, small and squamiform, etc.

In addition to the fact that it seems clear that, without a detailed knowledge of the subjectmatter, the risk of choosing incorrect replies is great, it also seems that from the moment at which an error has been committed, the species to be identified, having been eliminated, will not appear.

In brief and to summarise, these known methods of the prior art are considerably lacking in flexibility, they require a detailed knowledge of the subject-matter, do not accept an error of observation and judgement, do not tolerate lack of information, require a reply to each question and, furthermore, take a long time to implement.

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN HIGHER EDUCATION, Fall 1991, USA, volume 3, N o 1, ISSN 1042-1726, pages 85-103, RAGAN L.C. "Hypermedia in the plant sciences the Weed Key and Identification System/Videodisc" describes a search system for identifying plant species on the basis of characteristics selected by the user. This system is designed to take into account the situation where some data are missing or uncertain and therefore to use only information which an untrained user is capable of providing: the latter is able not to provide information on some criteria or can reply "uncertain" to some criteria in order not to eliminate the species sought by an incorrect reply on a criterion. Once information has been given on one or more criteria, the search can be initiated at any time and the system then provides a list of species corresponding to this/those criterion/a or a negative reply if no species meets the criteria. The user can cause texts and images relating to the selected species to be displayed.

However, this system is dichotomising by nature because, if there is an incorrect reply on a single criterion, the corresponding species are systematically eliminated and can be found again only by taking up the search again with (a) corrected criterion/a or corrected information.

The aim of the invention is to overcome these disadvantages by providing the user with a method for identifying miscellaneous objects, species or items, which method is very flexible, does not require a detailed knowledge of the subject-matter, being useable by anyone having a minimum power of observation, tolerates errors of observation and judgement while avoiding the systematic elimination of a subject even if some of the replies made to the identifying features or criteria selected by the •coo user prove to be erroneous, and leaves it to the *e S. user to choose the identifying features or criteria to which he wishes to reply.

~According to one aspect the invention resides in a method for identifying miscellaneous objects, species or items by means of a list formed by sets of identifying features, each set corresponding to a known object, species or item, said list being entered in a computer memory, the method being characterised by the following steps: the user interactively interrogates the list by entering successively in the computer, in the order he desires, features of the object, species or item to be identified which seem to him to be determining, he selects each time on the screen of the computer which displays a composite picture or definition of the object, species or item to be identified, the said features and puts them in agreement with the predetermined portions he observes of the object, species or item which have the feature in question, the composite picture being displayed on the computer screen and being then updated as the selected features are entered, and after each feature has been entered, the computer identifies and displays on the screen a •g limited number of known object, species or items see.

corresponding to at least some of the features entered up to that point, by means of a calculation of probabilities effected for each known object, species or item appearing in the list, the calculation being based on a weighting between the features.

o Advantageously, after selection and verification, other criteria are optionally entered for identification (if the selected subject is not satisfactory) or to check the previous identification (as a safety measure) According to a preferred embodiment of the method, after selection or verification, given selection criteria retained at the beginning are optionally corrected by removing those criteria or by modifying them, which enables the reliability of the diagnosis to be improved.

In a preferred embodiment, the computer is caused to calculate and display, in respect of the identified objects, species or items, an identification probability corresponding to a weighting between exact criteria and non-exact criteria. Advantageously, for the.probability calculation carried out by the computer, a greater weight is allocated to some criteria than to others, as a function of the "discriminating" nature of the criterion in question. Thus, for example, if the colour of a flower is not always determining, the fact that the plant which carries the flower has or does not have thorns is much more determining.

Of the numerous uses of the method of the invention, attention has turned very especially to the identification of botanical species; in such an application, the selection criteria which have been entered in the memory and which can be chosen by the user comprise usual identifying criteria or features such as: habit, phyllotaxis, simple or composite leaves, thorns, type of flower, type of root, the user choosing as desired, and in the order he considers the most appropriate to the case in point, the selection criteria which he chooses and which he can "click" onto in the composite picture of the botanical species, which composite picture is updated progressively as the selected criteria are retained by the user.

The invention and its implementation will be appreciated more clearly by means of the following description given with reference to the appended drawings which illustrate, by way of example, some procedures for identifying botanical species.

In the drawings: Figure 1 illustrates what appears on the user's computer screen at the beginning of the procedure for identifying a botanical species, Figure 2 shows a fresh screen on which the user will determine the habit of the subject to be identified, Figure 3 shows what appears on the screen after the composite picture has been modified by the computer system in order to integrate the habit selected by the user, Figure 4 shows a fresh screen on which the user will select the type of leaves corresponding to the subject to be identified, Figure 5 shows the following screen on which the composite picture integrates the fresh 8 additional criterion selected by the user in relation to the type of leaves of the subject, Figure 6 indicates the species selected by the computer which meet the criteria entered, allocating to each species of the list an identification probability which corresponds to the probability that the specimen corresponds to that species, Figure 7 shows the following screen of the procedure in which the user has returned to the illustration of Figure 5, wishing to refine his selection by a fresh criterion, Figure 8 illustrates the following screen enabling the user to select the additional criterion retained, namely, in this case, phyllotaxis, Figure 9 shows the following screen in which the composite picture comprises all the criteria previously entered, the computer this time identifying only a single species which corresponds 100% to the criteria entered, Figure 10 illustrates in the form of a drawing the species identified by the computer for comparison by the user with the subject, Figure 11 illustrates the following screen in which the user has asked for an enlarged view of the drawing and, in particular, of the plantlet in order to verify the identification, Figure 12 illustrates the composite picture displayed at the end of another identification procedure by the computer, after the user has entered several criteria and, on the basis of those criteria, a species appears to be identified with a fairly high degree of probability.

Reference will first of all be made to Figure 1 in which the user has before him on the computer screen a typical composite picture of a plant basically comprising a stem i, several leaves distributed along the stem, a flower 3, and roots 4.

In addition, the right-hand side of the screen shows on a larger scale a leaf 5 having a given number of places enclosed in rectangles permitting the identification of, for example: at 6, the attachment of the leaf 5 to the stem 1, at 7, the naissance of the leaf, at 8, the lateral edge of the leaf, at 9 the tip of the leaf, etc...

Appearing on the extreme right of the screen are also clear inscriptions and logos: respectively "no species identified" the drawing of a leaf or a grass; "phyllotaxis"; "habit"; and finally the button "calculation". The use and the meaning of these expressions and logos will appear hereinafter.

With the subject to be identified before his eyes, the user first of all notices that the plant is a creeping plant. Since this criterion seems to him to be particularly determining, the user "clicks" onto the logo "habit" in Figure 1. In accordance with conventional information science procedures, the software contained in the computer responds to this "click" of the mouse by displaying, as indicated in Figure 2, a screen on which several diagrammatic nabits appear.

On this screen, the user "clicks" onto the crawling habit as shown in a frame. The following screen then appears in Figure 3 in which the composite picture of the plant is shown again but with the modification of a crawling habit.

The user now enters a new criterion relating to the type of leaf. He clicks onto a leaf of the composite picture or, if desired, onto the corresponding logo at the right-hand side of the screen, the computer displaying the screen of Figure 4 which offers the user simple leaves (at the top of the screen) or composite leaves (at the bottom of the screen). Because the subject has composite leaves, the user clicks onto the composite leaves as shown diagrammatically by the rectangle framing the lower line. In Figure 5, the composite picture is updated: crawling habit, composite leaves. In this situation, it will be noted that the computer displays "two species 100% identified"; this means that only two species contained in the computer's memory meet the set of criteria which have just been entered. The user can either consult the species in question or refine the procedure.

If he wishes to consult the list of species, he clicks onto calculation, which causes the screen illustrated in Figure 6 to appear with, at the top left, the small-scale reminder of the updated composite picture and, below, the list of species found in decreasing weight of probability.

The two 100% species: Tribulus terrestris and Zornia glochidiata mean that these two species have all of the criteria identified. The other species found, with weightings of from 62% to 38%, mean that, for those species, at least one of the criteria does not correspond.

In this situation, the user chooses to refine the procedure; he clicks onto the composite picture at the top left of Figure 6 returning to the screen of Figure 7 which is identical to that of Figure He then clicks onto "phyllotaxis"; the computer displays the screen of Figure 8, proposing three possible leaf attachments to the stem. The user selects opposite phyllotaxis as indicated in framed form on the left of the screen of Figure 8.

The computer then displays the screen of Figure 9, indicating a single 100% identified species, that is to say, having all the criteria concerned.

The user then calls up that species and verifies the agreement if the images, photos and drawings with his specimen. Figure 10 shows only the drawing as it appears on screen. In the case concerned, the identified species was Tribulus terrestris. The identification is confirmed by verification as illustrated in Figure 11 of a full-screen drawing of the plant with enlargement of the plantlet which appears on the right of the screen.

In Figure 10, it will be observed that the computer has selected approximately 20 different species and has allocated to them probability coefficients corresponding to the number of correct criteria weighted by the relative importance of the criteria as indicated above.

It will thus be appreciated, for example, that Zornia glochidiata, which had been identified as corresponding 100% to the screen of Figure 6, is now retained only with a 57% probability; the difference is due to the fact that the user has entered an important additional criterion, namely opposite phyllotaxis, which Zornia glochidiata does not meet and it is therefore finally not the plant to be identified.

Referring to Figure 12,.this Figure shows the typical case where the user has succeeded in identifying a plant fairly rapidly and easily, although he has been mistaken in the determination of some identifying criteria.

The screen of Figure 12 gives the composite picture of a plant of which the various criteria as identified in the various rectangles marked to 17 in the Figure have been entered for identification by the user, namely, respectively: naissance of the leaf on the stem, starting shape of the leaf, lateral edge of the leaf, tip of the leaf, cross-section of the stem, general shape of the leaf, pilosity of the upper face of the leaf and pilosity of the lower face.

14 In the case under consideration, the computer has identified the plant as being "Mollugo nudicaulis" with 92% probability, the user having been mistaken in the identification of some criteria which, however, were of secondary importance. By comparison with the species selected by the computer and full-screen display of the photos and drawings of the species in question, the user can verify whether the species in question is the correct one. If it is not, he can refer to the following species which he can consult, advantageously first verifying the species selected by the computer in descending order of probability.

At this stage the user can optionally also correct, by verification, any criterion which he has entered erroneously or he can add an additional criterion, such as, for example, the phyllotaxis or the presence or absence of a flower or the shape of the roots and attachment, this being effected in case of doubt or to verify the accuracy of the diagnosis.

It will be appreciated from the above description that the identification method of the invention is very versatile because it is very tolerant of a lack of information and even an error in secondary features or criteria of which the identification is not always easy. Of course, identification will be effected all the more rapidly if the user enters determining criteria, that is to say, of substantial weight and reliable identification.

In addition, although the invention has been illustrated in connection with the identification of botanical species, it will be appreciated that the method can also be used in connection with the identification of any desired object or item which can be defined by any criteria of appearance, shape, weight and, generally, having any intrinsic qualities whatever. The invention could thus be used, for example, in the identification of persons, in the identification of industrial objects, etc. It would seem that its most immediate and useful applications must concern identification in the biological field, for example, the identification of viruses, fungi, animals, agricultural varieties and plants. The embodiments indicated in connection with the identification of some botanical varieties can be immediately extrapolated to identification broadened to cover the entire biological domain.

i. Method for identifying miscellaneous objects, species or items by means of a list formed by sets of identifying features, each set corresponding to a known object, species or item, said list being entered in a computer memory, the method being characterised by the following steps: the user interactively interrogates the list by entering successively in the computer, in the order he desires, features of the object, species or item to be identified which seem to him coo to be determining, he selects each time on the S. screen of the computer which displays a composite picture or definition of the object, species or item to be identified, the said features and puts them in agreement with the predetermined portions he observes of the object, species or item which have the feature in question, Sthe composite picture being displayed on the computer screen and being then updated as the selected features are entered, and after each feature has been entered, the computer identifies and displays on the screen a limited number of known object, species or items corresponding to at least some of the features entered up to that point, by means of a calculation of probabilities effected for each known object, species or item appearing in the list, the calculation being based on a weighting between the

Claims (4)

1. 2. Method according to Claim 1, characterised in that, after each identification and display step, other features are optionally entered to refine or check the previous identification.
2. 3. Method according to Claim 1 or Claim 2, characterised in that, after each identification and display step, the user optionally corrects given features already entered by removing those features or by modifying them.
3. 4. Method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterised in that, for the calculation of probabilities, the computer allocates a greater weight to some features than to others. Application of the method of identification according to any one of the preceding claims to the identification of species in the biological field, characterised in that the identifying features which have been entered in the computer memory and which can be selected by the user comprise usual identifying features, such as, for example, for recognition of a botanical species: habitat, phyllotaxis, simple or composite leaves, thorns, type of flower, type of root, the user 18 choosing, as desired, and in the order which he considers the most appropriate to the case in point, the identifying features which he selects.
4. 6. Method for identifying miscellaneous objects, species or items substantially as herein described. 9 a a *a. METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING MISCELLANEOUS OBJECTS, SPECIES OR ITEMS AND USES THEREOF IN THE NAME OF CENTRE DE COOPtRATION INTERNATIONALE EN RECHERCHE AGRONOMIQUE POUR LE DtVELOPPEMENT ABSTRACT The invention relates to a method for identifying items to which a list of identifying features corresponds. In accordance with the method, the list is entered in a computer memory and the list is interrogated by comparison with features which are chosen by locating them on a composite picture displayed by the computer and updated successively in accordance with previously selected criteria. The invention can be applied especially to the identification of botanical species. Figure