Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40770239›Full record

ArticleScientific data2025

Machine learning training data: over 500,000 images of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) with species labels.

Friederike Barkmann, Andreas Lindner, Ronald Würflinger, Helmut Höttinger, Johannes Rüdisser

Abstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Friederike BarkmannDepartment of Ecology, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-4382-6112
Andreas LindnerAdvanced Computing Austria ACA GmbH, Wien, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-7783-8878
Ronald WürflingerBilla Foundation Blühendes Österreich, Wiener Neustadt, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6644-4374
Helmut HöttingerBilla Foundation Blühendes Österreich, Wiener Neustadt, Austria.
Johannes RüdisserDepartment of Ecology, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. johannes.ruedisser@uibk.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0001-6498-7068

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning models can accelerate the processing of image-based biodiversity data and provide educational value by giving direct feedback to citizen scientists. However, the training of such models requires large amounts of labelled data and not all species are equally suited for identification from images alone. Most butterfly and many moth species (Lepidoptera) which play an important role as biodiversity indicators are well-suited for such approaches. This dataset contains over 540.000 images of 185 butterfly and moth species that occur in Austria. Images were collected by citizen scientists with the application "Schmetterlinge Österreichs" and correct species identification was ensured by an experienced entomologist. The number of images per species ranges from one to nearly 30.000. Such a strong class imbalance is common in datasets of species records. The dataset is larger than other published dataset of butterfly and moth images and offers opportunities for the training and evaluation of machine learning models on the fine-grained classification task of species identification.

Indexed as

ButterfliesMachine LearningMothsAnimalsAustriaBiodiversityDeep LearningImage Processing, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID40770239
PMCPMC12329013

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.