MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2902009309 · doi:10.1149/ma2018-02/56/1997

Artificial Intelligence for Water Quality Monitoring

2018· article· en· W2902009309 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Waterloo
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningConvolutional neural networkIdentification (biology)Set (abstract data type)Mobile devicePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkMachine learningComputer vision

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Emerging trends in Artificial Intelligence (AI) have provided a path to make better predictions in a variety of fields, including the detection of medical diseases, weather patterns, water, food quality patterns, remote sensing etc. Deep learning, a branch of AI that uses deep convolutional neural networks (CNN) modeled after the human brain, have been prominently used for accurate identification of facial features, text, and voice. This technique is used predominantly to classify a set of objects, that may not necessarily have a fixed set of features, making it very difficult to detect programmatically. As an example, researchers have started implementing deep learning techniques to identify non-uniform cancer cells from the high-resolution microscopic images of tissue samples. Similarly, most of the current screening/diagnostic devices are color-based indicators. By looking at the amount of color appearance on sensor zones of such devices, one can identify the level of certain contaminants, diseases or infections. Typically, look-up tables will be provided to classify the level of sensing parameters based on color intensity. This is a task that would be extremely time consuming and challenging to do physically, given that a complete database mapping color to concentration would have to be created and a minor difference may or may not indicate a significant concentration change. Deep learning will be very helpful for accurate identification of color and its intensity on such diagnostic devices. In the present work, we have developed an AI-based mobile application platform, that can capture the sensor image using an inbuilt smartphone camera, identify the presence of sensing parameter and classify the level of sensing parameter based on color intensity identified in the training sets on the captured image using deep CNN algorithm. As a test case, we have implemented the developed AI-based mobile application platform for water quality monitoring for bacterial contamination. We used a low-cost rapid test kit i.e., Mobile Water Kit (MWK), developed by Gunda et al. [ Anal. Methods, 2014, 6, 6236-6246 and Analyst, 2016, 141, 2920-2929 ] for monitoring the quality of water for bacterial contamination. MWK detects indicator bacteria ( E. coli ) in water samples within an hour, based on the appearance of pinkish red color on the surface of the sensing area. The color intensity represents the level of bacteria in water samples. Using the AI-based mobile app, we capture the image of the MWK sensing area (after testing water samples) and classify them into E. coli present images (i.e. E. coli images) and E. coli absent images (non- E. coli images). Deep learning works very well when there is an abundance of training data and there are certain factors that will make it difficult to programmatically distinguish between types. Using traditional computer vision techniques, one would scan the colors of each concentration. However, determining the color intensity for each concentration level is very difficult (especially because these are different shades of pinkish red for MWK). Using deep learning, this is made easy as the system determines these color intensities through training sets that have been provided statistically. In this present work, we have collected training data from MWK by testing the water samples with known concentrations of E. coli bacteria and then manually segregated the captured images based on whether the sample contains E. coli or not. Then we wrote a labeling script to label these images based on their type. We then used Google Tensorflow (a deep learning Artificial Intelligence open source tool) to distinguish between E. coli and non- E. coli images. Subsequently, we used the labeling script to classify whether an MWK tested image contains E. coli or not. As of now, we can classify the images with approximately 99% accuracy. We will also able to predict concentration levels using this method.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,019
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,100
Tête enseignante GPT0,337
Écart entre enseignants0,237 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle