Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 5, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Integrating environmental sensor data with leaf imagery is widely reported to boost crop disease classification accuracy. In this work, we reveal that these reported gains are often artifacts of dataset construction: because a single sensor reading is shared across many images collected in a single session (one farm on one date), multimodal networks can predict disease simply by memorizing session identities. Analyzing two widely used Korean datasets, the Crop Disease Diagnosis (CDD) benchmark and an AI Hub pest/disease dataset, we demonstrate that nearly all images share sensor values, with 91.9% of CDD test images having exact sensor duplicates in the training set. Remarkably, an image-free classifier given only timestamps matches or exceeds sensor-driven predictions across all seven evaluated crops, and matches the published macro-F1 of a state-of-the-art CDD fusion model. These results indicate that performance gains on standard random splits cannot be disentangled from session leakage. We propose that multimodal crop studies must evaluate on session-held-out splits and report performance against sensor-free date-time baselines to ensure genuine generalization.