Automated Insect Detection and Removal via Image Analysis

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The proliferation of insects such as thrips, mites, and aphids in food and crops is exacerbated by the decreased effectiveness of pesticides, making it difficult to detect and remove these pests without harming the food or using large-scale methods that are inefficient.

Innovation Solution

A computer image analysis system that magnifies images of substrates, recognizes insects using trained processors, and triggers an action head to remove or neutralize identified pests, with the option to scan wide areas and perform mitigation actions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If large scale heating methods are used to eliminate insects, then insect removal effectiveness is improved, but food or material damage increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinsect removal effectivenessVSAvoidfood or material damage
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system divides the large area into multiple small zones, each inspected and treated individually. The imaging device scans specific regions, and when insects are detected, only that localized area is subjected to the action head treatment, rather than heating the entire food item or material surface.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The invention applies treatment only to the specific location where insects are detected, rather than applying large-scale heating or pesticides to the entire surface. The action head is positioned precisely at the insect location to deliver targeted removal or neutralization, preserving the quality of the surrounding food or material.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If pesticides are used to control insects, then insect population is reduced, but environmental harm and resistance development increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinsect control effectivenessVSAvoidenvironmental harm and resistance
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system extracts and removes individual insects from the food or material surface using the action head, rather than relying on pesticides to kill them. This physical removal approach eliminates the need for chemical substances that can harm the environment and contribute to resistance development.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The imaging device and action head work together as an autonomous system that detects and removes insects without requiring external chemical interventions. The system serves itself by using visual detection to guide precise mechanical or thermal removal, eliminating dependency on pesticides.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Ease of operation

If washing methods are used to remove insects, then cleaning action is applied, but insect removal effectiveness decreases for difficult-to-dislodge insects

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecleaning simplicityVSAvoidinsect removal effectiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system replaces general mechanical washing with a specialized imaging-guided action head that can apply focused mechanical or thermal force. The imaging device identifies insect locations and the action head delivers targeted removal force, overcoming the limitations of non-specific washing for stubborn insects.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The imaging device uses visual detection (analogous to color/contrast detection) to identify insects against the food or material background. By detecting visual differences, the system locates insects that are invisible to the naked eye and directs the action head to their precise locations for effective removal.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #32Color changes

4Measurement precision

If manual inspection for insects is performed, then detection capability is maintained, but inspection time and labor requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinsect detection capabilityVSAvoidinspection time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The imaging device creates digital copies (images) of the food or material surface, allowing the system to analyze and inspect areas that would be time-consuming to examine manually. The captured images are processed to identify insects, enabling rapid inspection of large surfaces without human labor constraints.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The imaging device acts as an intermediary between the inspector and the food or material surface. Instead of direct manual inspection, the system uses visual capture and image processing to detect insects, significantly reducing inspection time while maintaining or improving detection capability through automated analysis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS9852362B2Object image recognition and instant active response with enhanced application and utility
Publication Date: 2017.12.26 FRYSHMAN BERNARD
  • US9852362B2 patent drawing
  • US9852362B2 patent drawing
  • US9852362B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A device for detecting and marking ticks and tick bites on a body or limb. The device has an image capturing device that is in communication with image recognition software. Images of skin are analyzed to detect objects consistent with ticks or tick bites. Once such object is detected, the device automatically disperses a marking material in the proximity of the detected tick or tick bite.