Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10316/114621
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMagalhães, Sandro Costa-
dc.contributor.authorSantos, Filipe Neves-
dc.contributor.authorMachado, Pedro-
dc.contributor.authorMoreira, António Paulo-
dc.contributor.authorDias, Jorge-
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-03T08:26:26Z-
dc.date.available2024-04-03T08:26:26Z-
dc.date.issued2022-11-21-
dc.identifier.issn09521976pt
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10316/114621-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Visual perception enables robots to perceive the environment. Visual data is processed using computer vision algorithms that are usually time-expensive and require powerful devices to process the visual data in real-time, which is unfeasible for open-field robots with limited energy. This work benchmarks the performance of different heterogeneous platforms for object detection in real-time. This research benchmarks three architectures: embedded GPU -- Graphical Processing Units (such as NVIDIA Jetson Nano 2 GB and 4 GB, and NVIDIA Jetson TX2), TPU -- Tensor Processing Unit (such as Coral Dev Board TPU), and DPU -- Deep Learning Processor Unit (such as in AMD-Xilinx ZCU104 Development Board, and AMD-Xilinx Kria KV260 Starter Kit). Method: The authors used the RetinaNet ResNet-50 fine-tuned using the natural VineSet dataset. After the trained model was converted and compiled for target-specific hardware formats to improve the execution efficiency. Conclusions and Results: The platforms were assessed in terms of performance of the evaluation metrics and efficiency (time of inference). Graphical Processing Units (GPUs) were the slowest devices, running at 3 FPS to 5 FPS, and Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) were the fastest devices, running at 14 FPS to 25 FPS. The efficiency of the Tensor Processing Unit (TPU) is irrelevant and similar to NVIDIA Jetson TX2. TPU and GPU are the most power-efficient, consuming about 5W. The performance differences, in the evaluation metrics, across devices are irrelevant and have an F1 of about 70 % and mean Average Precision (mAP) of about 60 %.pt
dc.language.isoengpt
dc.publisherElsevierpt
dc.relationscholarship SFRH/BD/147117/2019pt
dc.relationEuropean Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under Grant 101004085pt
dc.rightsopenAccesspt
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/pt
dc.subjectEmbedded systemspt
dc.subjectHeterogeneous platformspt
dc.subjectObject detectionpt
dc.subjectSSD resNetpt
dc.subjectRetinaNet resNetpt
dc.titleBenchmarking Edge Computing Devices for Grape Bunches and Trunks Detection using Accelerated Object Detection Single Shot MultiBox Deep Learning Modelspt
dc.typearticle-
degois.publication.firstPage105604pt
degois.publication.titleEngineering Applications of Artificial Intelligencept
dc.peerreviewedyespt
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105604pt
degois.publication.volume117pt
dc.date.embargo2022-11-21*
uc.date.periodoEmbargo0pt
item.openairetypearticle-
item.fulltextCom Texto completo-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
crisitem.author.researchunitISR - Institute of Systems and Robotics-
crisitem.author.parentresearchunitUniversity of Coimbra-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-2725-8867-
Appears in Collections:FCTUC Eng.Electrotécnica - Artigos em Revistas Internacionais
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

45
checked on Jul 17, 2024

Download(s)

20
checked on Jul 17, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons