Non-destructive assessment of chicken egg fertility using hyperspectral imaging technique
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Canadian chicken industry is a huge one with about 2,836 regulated producers spread across the provinces producing, and of which 61% of production originated from Quebec and Ontario. According to the Agriculture and Agri-food Canada report 2017, total hatching egg set (for both egg production chicks and broilers) was over 1.0 billion. With fertility rate observed in the year 2017 to be around 82%, there were about 180 million unhatched eggs incubated in Canada for year 2017 alone. This meant a whooping sum of at least 311 million Canadian dollars was wasted by the hatchery industries towards incubating unhatched eggs for the year 2017. Whereas, this non-hatching, non-fertile eggs can find useful applications as commercial table eggs or low-grade food stock if they can be detected early and isolated accordingly, especially prior to incubation. The primary goal of this research is to investigate the use of a near infrared (NIR) hyperspectral imaging (HSI) technique in a non-destructive assessment of early chicken egg fertility recognition and discrimination.The first study examined the suitability of a chemometric partial least square (PLS) regression algorithm, towards building a robust model for objective prediction of chicken egg fertility. For the brown eggs on considered incubation days 0 to 4, true positive rates (TPR) ranged from 95.65% to 100% and true negative rates (TNR) ranged from 88.10% to 93.57%. White eggs on the other hand has true positive rates (TPR) ranging from 95.24% to 100% and true negative rates (TNR) ranging from 91.35% to 95.83%. All results were obtained at selected threshold values of between 0.50-0.85. The results indicated that the adapted PLS regression technique can discriminate between fertile and non-fertile eggs, prior to incubation and on different days of incubation. The results were promising with the use of many PLS components (PCs), but the use of fewer PCs shifted classification accuracies in favour of the prevalent class due to the imbalance data structure phenomenon. It therefore became imperative to improve on the present implementation mode of PLS for classification algorithm. Based on the present results, the second study tested the appropriateness of a PLSDA feature selection algorithm, for identifying informative features, towards improving model performance for early chicken egg fertility classification. With only a maximum number of 5 PCs considered, classifier performance greatly improved with selected ratio features; having TPR, TNR, and AUC (area under ROC curve) values in the range of 90-100%. Chicken egg fertility model structure was eventually successfully developed, validated, and verified using optimum number of 3 PCs.Understanding that the modelling approach used to identify informative variables might not be the best approach to translate the identified features into Industrial practice, 10 different classifier performances were compared and contrasted in the third study for adoptability potentials towards building an industrial online chicken egg fertility assessment system. From the sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F1-score values of 100.00%, 87.00%, 93.80%, and 96.80% respectively for brown eggs and 100.00%, 71.40%, 87.80%, and 93.50% respectively for white eggs, the k-nearest neighbours (KNN) classifier was adjudged preferable above its other counterparts. The final study examined the performance of a synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) algorithm on a larger industrial scale (10, 000) chicken egg fertility data set. KNN classifier already presented as optimal among other classifiers was used for discrimination and performance evaluated from sensitivity (SEN- 92.10%), specificity (SPE- 80.50%), precision (PPV- 99.10%), AUC- 91.70%, and overall accuracy (OVA- 91.60%). Our latest results based on the considered evaluation criteria were comparable with previous results, showing reproducibility potential of our methodology
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».