MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Contrast Enhancement Using Brightness Preserving Histogram Equalization Technique for Classification of Date Varieties

2014· article· en· W2616395079 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel Thomas, Annamalai Manickavasagan, Lazhar Khriji, Rashid Al‐Yahyai

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Engineering Research [TJER] · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDate Palm Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKurtosisHistogram equalizationHistogramBrightnessArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)GrayscaleEntropy (arrow of time)SkewnessMathematicsAdaptive histogram equalizationComputer visionComputer sciencePixelStatisticsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer vision technique is becoming popular for quality assessment of many products in food industries. Image enhancement is the first step in analyzing the images in order to obtain detailed information for the determination of quality. In this study, Brightness preserving histogram equalization technique was used to enhance the features of gray scale images to classify three date varieties (Khalas, Fard and Madina). Mean, entropy, kurtosis and skewness features were extracted from the original and enhanced images. Mean and entropy from original images and kurtosis from the enhanced images were selected based on Lukka's feature selection approach. An overall classification efficiency of 93.72% was achieved with just three features. Brightness preserving histogram equalization technique has great potential to improve the classification in various quality attributes of food and agricultural products with minimum features.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Engineering Research [TJER]Same topicDate Palm Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207