https://www.facebook.com/groups/38417209275/permalink/10162385097589276/
This is an interesting comparison of the ID accuracy of various apps. The Facebook post has links to previous comparisons as well.
Interestingly iNaturalist comes out on top, but Seek comes out on the bottom. According to their results Seek is now worse than it was in the past, but iNat is excellent.
I sometimes use Google Lens when iNat’s CV says dunno.
If the pictures are sharp - sometimes the 3 of us get there together.
That is indeed interesting! Thank you for sharing.
The only other app I have used in the past besides iNat was PlantNet and unfortunately, I didn’t find it to be very accurate (I’m in Europe, perhaps it is better in other places?). And there were lots of mis-identified pictures in the references.
Back when I used it, it also didn’t allow for anything other than species-level IDs (I guess that has changed though?) which is why I switched to iNat.
What I really liked about that app where the confidence percentages, though!
but we have an app for that
I have gratefully used it since it was built.
673 users - come and join us.
Nice! Just added it.
I usually use a non-chromium browser for iNat, so I don’t know how much I’ll use it, but I definitely have it now, if I want it. :D
Thank you!
The author of the Facebook post, Shmace Shmandages, mentioned that the post was a response to a previous post. The link to the prior post was down in the comments, but that earlier Facebook post did not detail the methods. The details were in a linked article. For those who want to read the article that eventually prompted the response post:
https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/plant-identification-theres-an-app-for-that-actually-several
The original article was authored by Erin Hill who is with the Michigan State University Extension, Department of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences on March 26, 2024.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.