MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056418479 · doi:10.5430/air.v1n2p67

Detection of damaged seeds in laboratory evaluation of precision planter using impact acoustics and artificial neural networks

2012· article· en· W2056418479 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hadi Karimi, Hossein Navid, Asghar Mahmoudi

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Intelligence Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil Mechanics and Vehicle Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFast Fourier transformArtificial neural networkMetering modeAcousticsMean squared errorFeature (linguistics)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Point (geometry)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematicsStatisticsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, feasibility of laboratory detection of damaged seeds in precision planters caused by malfunction of seed metering device was investigated. An acoustic-based intelligent system was developed for detection of damaged pelleted tomato seeds. To improve the Artificial Neural Network (ANN) models a total of 2000 seeds sound signals, 1000 samples for damaged seeds and 1000 for undamaged ones were recorded. When seed metering device drove out seeds, the ejected seeds were impacted to steel plate, and their acoustic signals were recorded from the impact. The bounced seeds lied on the running grease belt. In each stage of experiments, damaged seeds were determined manually in grease belt and related damaged seed sound signals were designated. Achieved acoustic signals, were processed and potential features were extracted from the analysis of sound signals in time and frequency domains. The method is based on feature generation by Fast Fourier Transform (FFT), feature selection by statistical methods and classification by Multilayer Feed forward Neural Network. Features such as amplitude, phase and power spectrum of sound signals were computed through a 1024-point FFT. By using statistical factors (maximum, minimum, median, mean and variance) for each vector of data, feature vector was reduced to 15 factors. In developing the ANN models, several ANN architectures, each having different numbers of neurons in hidden layer, were evaluated. The best model was chosen after a number of evaluations based on minimizing the mean square error (MSE), correct detection rate (CDR) and correlation coefficient (r). Selected ANN, 15-17-2 was configured for classification. CDR of the proposed ANN model for undamaged and damaged seeds was 99.49 and 100 respectively. MSE of the system was found to be 0.0109.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArtificial Intelligence ResearchSame topicSoil Mechanics and Vehicle DynamicsFrench-language works237,207