Automatic Date Fruit Recognition Using Outlier Detection Techniques and Gaussian Mixture Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a method for automatically recognizing different date varieties. The presence of outlier samples could significantly degrade the recognition outcomes. Therefore, we separately prune samples of each variety from outliers using the Pruning Local Distance-based Outlier Factor (PLDOF) method. Samples of the same variety could have several visual appearances because of the noticeable variation in terms of their visual characteristics. Thus, in order to take this intra-variation into account, we model each variety with a Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM), where each component within the GMM corresponds to one visual appearance. Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm was used for parameters estimation and Davies-Bouldin index was used to automatically and precisely estimate the number of components (i.e., appearances). Compared to the related studies, the proposed method 1) is capable to recognize samples though the noticeable variation, in terms of maturity stage and hardness degree, within some varieties; 2) achieves a high recognition rate in spite of the presence of outlier samples; 3) is capable to distinguish between the highly confusing varieties; 4) is fully automatic, as it does not require neither physical measurements nor human assistance. For testing purposes, we introduce a new benchmark which includes the highest number of varieties (11) compared to the previous studies. Experiments show that our method has significantly outperformed several methods, where a high recognition rate of 97.8% has been reached.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".