Deep Learning-Based Soil Texture Segmentation with ‎Yolov8 Model

  • Authors

    • Latha Reddy N. School of Computer Science and Engineering,‎ Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
    • Gopinath M. P. School of Computer Science and Engineering,‎ Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
    https://doi.org/10.14419/z5kryf33

    Received date: June 27, 2025

    Accepted date: September 30, 2025

    Published date: November 4, 2025

  • Uninhibited Arena Circumstances (UAC); Deep Yolov8 Segmentation (DUV8S); ‎Manifold Gabor Filters; Soil Segmentation; Deep Learning Models‎.

  • Abstract

    The analysis of traditional soil texture by chemical methods is both time-consuming and subject ‎to environmental hazards at a high cost. The researcher outlines a new Deep YOLOv8 ‎Segmentation approach (DYV8S), which segments soil textures in Un-Inhibited Arena ‎Circumstances (UAC) pictures. The research focuses on improving the detection of soil textures ‎through external factor reduction and avoids the requirement for chemical analysis. The proposed ‎DYV8S technique involves execution through four separate processes. High-resolution UAC ‎field images undergo a USDA-trio and YOLOv8 combination for extracting soil pixels. Semantic ‎segmentation of non-soil pixels occurs through the application of Tierce-SegNet, UNet, and ‎DeepLabV3+ models following their deployment for pixel removal. The implementation of ‎manifold Gabor filters extracts enhanced texture information associated with soil classification ‎improvement. A deep YOLOv8 model operating with adjusted hyperparameters performs pre-‎defined categories of soil texture classification and stitching procedures. The training involved ‎soil samples belonging to seven different texture classes. The DYV8S model delivered a 99.8% ‎accuracy rate at the same time, it showed a 0.05 error rate throughout the soil texture identification ‎process. Scientists documented three performance metrics, namely 0.869 Jaccard index and 0.931 ‎Dice Similarity Coefficient, and 0.976 Kappa statistic. The algorithm analysis established that ‎DYV8S achieved maximum accuracy in addition to exhibiting low misclassification rates. The ‎experimental method demonstrated high time efficiency while maintaining low expense levels ‎and safety aspects when compared to conventional chemical techniques. Maintaining controlled ‎environmental conditions alongside controlled illumination decreased the amount of distortion ‎during soil image analysis. High accuracy happens when the DYV8S model successfully ‎categorizes soil texture which beats traditional classification approaches. The integrated ‎processing strategy of segmentation with feature enhancement and deep learning systems ‎delivers a dependable method for soil texture classification while remaining quick and ‎economical, which improves decision-making for crops and fertilizers‎.

  • References

    1. Han, X.L., Jiang, N.J., Yang, Y.F., Choi, J., Singh, D.N., Beta, P., Du, Y.J. and Wang, Y.J., 2022. Deep learning-based approach for the instance seg-mentation of clayey soil desiccation cracks. Computers and Geotechnics, 146, p.104733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2022.104733.
    2. Zamani, V., Taghaddos, H., Gholipour, Y. and Pourreza, H., 2022. Deep semantic segmentation for visual scene understanding of soil types. Automation in Construction, 140, p.104342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104342
    3. Srivastava, P., Shukla, A. and Bansal, A., 2021. A comprehensive review on soil classification using deep learning and computer vision tech-niques. MultimeFig Tools and Applications, 80(10), pp.14887-14914. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-021-10544-5.
    4. Xu, J.J., Zhang, H., Tang, C.S., Cheng, Q., Liu, B. and Shi, B., 2022. Automatic soil desiccation crack recognition using deep learn-ing. Geotechnique, 72(4), pp.337-349. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.20.P.091.
    5. Jiang, Z.D., Owens, P.R., Zhang, C.L., Brye, K.R., Weindorf, D.C., Adhikari, K., Sun, Z.X., Sun, F.J. and Wang, Q.B., 2021. Towards a dynamic soil survey: Identifying and delineating soil horizons in-situ using deep learning. Geoderma, 401, p.115341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2021.115341.
    6. Rippner, D.A., Raja, P.V., Earles, J.M., Momayyezi, M., Buchko, A., Duong, F.V., Forrestel, E.J., Parkinson, D.Y., Shackel, K.A., Neyhart, J.L. and McElrone, A.J., 2022. A workflow for segmenting soil and plant X-ray computed tomography images with deep learning in Google’s Colaborato-ry. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13, p.893140. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.893140.
    7. Pham, T.H., Acharya, P., Bachina, S., Osterloh, K. and Nguyen, K.D., 2024. Deep-learning framework for optimal selection of soil sampling sites. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 217, p.108650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2024.108650.
    8. Wan, L., Li, S., Chen, Y., He, Z. and Shi, Y., 2022. Application of deep learning in land use classification for soil erosion using remote sens-ing. Frontiers in Earth Science, 10, p.849531. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.849531.
    9. Kim, W.S., Lee, D.H., Kim, T., Kim, G., Kim, H., Sim, T. and Kim, Y.J., 2021. One-shot classification-based tilled soil region segmentation for boundary guidance in autonomous tillage. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 189, p.106371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2021.106371.
    10. Zenkl, R., Timofte, R., Kirchgessner, N., Roth, L., Hund, A., Van Gool, L., Walter, A. and Aasen, H., 2022. Outdoor plant segmentation with deep learning for high-throughput field phenotyping on a diverse wheat dataset. Frontiers in plant science, 12, p.774068. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.774068.
    11. Kurtulmuş, E., Arslan, B. and Kurtulmuş, F., 2022. Deep learning for proximal soil sensor development towards smart irrigation. Expert Systems with Applications, 198, p.116812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.116812.
    12. Xu, J.J., Zhang, H., Tang, C.S., Cheng, Q., Tian, B.G., Liu, B. and Shi, B., 2022. Automatic soil crack recognition under uneven illumination condi-tion with the application of artificial intelligence. Engineering geology, 296, p.106495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106495.
    13. Smith, A.G., Han, E., Petersen, J., Olsen, N.A.F., Giese, C., Athmann, M., Dresbøll, D.B. and Thorup‐Kristensen, K., 2022. RootPainter: deep learn-ing segmentation of biological images with corrective annotation. New Phytologist, 236(2), pp.774-791. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.18387.
    14. Ong, P., Teo, K.S. and Sia, C.K., 2023. UAV-based weed detection in Chinese cabbage using deep learning. Smart Agricultural Technology, 4, p.100181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atech.2023.100181.
    15. Meng, X., Bao, Y., Wang, Y., Zhang, X. and Liu, H., 2022. An advanced soil organic carbon content prediction model via fused temporal-spatial-spectral (TSS) information based on machine learning and deep learning algorithms. Remote Sensing of Environment, 280, p.113166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2022.113166.
    16. Picon, A., San-Emeterio, M.G., Bereciartua-Perez, A., Klukas, C., Eggers, T. and Navarra-Mestre, R., 2022. Deep learning-based segmentation of multiple species of weeds and corn crop using synthetic and real image datasets. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 194, p.106719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2022.106719
    17. Kang, J., Liu, L., Zhang, F., Shen, C., Wang, N. and Shao, L., 2021. Semantic segmentation model of cotton roots in-situ image based on attention mechanism. Computers and electronics in agriculture, 189, p.106370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2021.106370.
    18. Zhang, J., Phoon, K.K., Zhang, D., Huang, H. and Tang, C., 2021. Deep learning-based evaluation of factor of safety with confidence interval for tunnel deformation in spatially variable soil. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 13(6), pp.1358-1367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2021.09.001.
    19. Dong, Y., Xuan, F., Li, Z., Su, W., Guo, H., Huang, X., Li, X. and Huang, J., 2023. Modeling the Corn Residue Coverage after Harvesting and be-fore Sowing in Northeast China by Random Forest and Soil Texture Zoning. Remote Sensing, 15(8), p.2179. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15082179.
    20. Phalempin, M., Krämer, L., Geers-Lucas, M., Isensee, F., & Schlüter, S. (2025). Deep learning segmentation of soil constituents in 3D X-ray CT im-ages. Geoderma, 458, 117321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2025.117321.
    21. Roy, S., Ansal, D. K., & Kumar, M. (2025, May). Soil Texture Prediction: Advances in Remote Sensing, Image Analysis, and Machine Learning. In 2025 Fourth International Conference on Smart Technologies, Communication and Robotics (STCR) (pp. 1-4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/STCR62650.2025.11020387.
    22. Benchabana, A., Kholladi, M.K., Bensaci, R. and Khaldi, B., 2023. Building detection in high-resolution remote sensing images by enhancing super-pixel segmentation and classification using deep learning approaches. Buildings, 13(7), p.1649. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13071649
    23. Han, W., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Wang, L., Huang, X., Li, J., Wang, S., Chen, W., Li, X., Feng, R. and Fan, R., 2023. A survey of machine learning and deep learning in remote sensing of geological environment: Challenges, advances, and opportunities. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Re-mote Sensing, 202, pp.87-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2023.05.032.
    24. Kim, D., Kim, T., Jeon, J. and Son, Y., 2023. Convolutional Neural Network-Based Soil Water Content and Density Prediction Model for Agricultural Land Using Soil Surface Images. Applied Sciences, 13(5), p.2936. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13052936.
    25. He, C., Liu, Y., Wang, D., Liu, S., Yu, L. and Ren, Y., 2023. Automatic extraction of bare soil land from high-resolution remote sensing images based on semantic segmentation with deep learning. Remote Sensing, 15(6), p.1646. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15061646.
    26. Maruthaiah, T., Vajravelu, S.K., Kaliyaperumal, V. and Kalaivanan, D., 2023. Soil texture identification using LIBS data combined with machine learning algorithm. Optik, 278, p.170691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2023.170691.
    27. Feng, D., Zhang, Z. and Yan, K., 2022. A semantic segmentation method for remote sensing images based on the Swin transformer fusion Gabor fil-ter. Ieee Access, 10, pp.77432-77451. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193248.
    28. Srivastava, P., Shukla, A. and Bansal, D.A., 2023. Transfer Learning Analysis for Predicting Soil Texture Classes from Soil Images. Available at SSRN 4192498. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2428396/v1.
    29. Azevedo, R.P., Corinto, L.M., Peixoto, D.S., De Figueiredo, T., Silveira, G.C.D., Peche, P.M., Pio, L.A.S., Pagliari, P.H., Curi, N. and Silva, B.M., 2022. Deep tillage strategies in perennial crop installation: Structural changes in contrasting soil classes. Plants, 11(17), p.2255. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11172255.
    30. Kurtulmuş, E., Arslan, B., & Kurtulmuş, F. (2022). Deep learning for proximal soil sensor development towards smart irrigation. Expert systems with applications, 198, 116812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.116812.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    N. , L. R. ., & M. P., G. . (2025). Deep Learning-Based Soil Texture Segmentation with ‎Yolov8 Model. International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 14(7), 104-122. https://doi.org/10.14419/z5kryf33