Generation of synthetic plant images using deep learning architecture

Abstract: Background: Generative Adversarial Networks (Goodfellow et al., 2014) (GANs)are the current state of the art machine learning data generating systems. Designed with two neural networks in the initial architecture proposal, generator and discriminator. These neural networks compete in a zero-sum game technique, to generate data having realistic properties inseparable to that of original datasets. GANs have interesting applications in various domains like Image synthesis, 3D object generation in gaming industry, fake music generation(Dong et al.), text to image synthesis and many more. Despite having a widespread application domains, GANs are popular for image data synthesis. Various architectures have been developed for image synthesis evolving from fuzzy images of digits to photorealistic images. Objectives: In this research work, we study various literature on different GAN architectures. To understand significant works done essentially to improve the GAN architectures. The primary objective of this research work is synthesis of plant images using Style GAN (Karras, Laine and Aila, 2018) variant of GAN using style transfer. The research also focuses on identifying various machine learning performance evaluation metrics that can be used to measure Style GAN model for the generated image datasets. Methods: A mixed method approach is used in this research. We review various literature work on GANs and elaborate in detail how each GAN networks are designed and how they evolved over the base architecture. We then study the style GAN (Karras, Laine and Aila, 2018a) design details. We then study related literature works on GAN model performance evaluation and measure the quality of generated image datasets. We conduct an experiment to implement the Style based GAN on leaf dataset(Kumar et al., 2012) to generate leaf images that are similar to the ground truth. We describe in detail various steps in the experiment like data collection, preprocessing, training and configuration. Also, we evaluate the performance of Style GAN training model on the leaf dataset. Results: We present the results of literature review and the conducted experiment to address the research questions. We review and elaborate various GAN architecture and their key contributions. We also review numerous qualitative and quantitative evaluation metrics to measure the performance of a GAN architecture. We then present the generated synthetic data samples from the Style based GAN learning model at various training GPU hours and the latest synthetic data sample after training for around ~8 GPU days on leafsnap dataset (Kumar et al., 2012). The results we present have a decent quality to expand the dataset for most of the tested samples. We then visualize the model performance by tensorboard graphs and an overall computational graph for the learning model. We calculate the Fréchet Inception Distance score for our leaf Style GAN and is observed to be 26.4268 (the lower the better). Conclusion: We conclude the research work with an overall review of sections in the paper. The generated fake samples are much similar to the input ground truth and appear to be convincingly realistic for a human visual judgement. However, the calculated FID score to measure the performance of the leaf StyleGAN accumulates a large value compared to that of Style GANs original celebrity HD faces image data set. We attempted to analyze the reasons for this large score.