MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081745645 · doi:10.3390/horticulturae6030053

Measuring Camellia Petal Color Using a Portable Color Sensor

2020· article· en· W3081745645 on OpenAlex
Phillip G. Post, Mark A. Schlautman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHorticulturae · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetalCamelliaChartColor differenceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceHorticultureBiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The color of petals of flowering plants is often determined by comparing one or more of the petals to various Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) Colour Chart cards until a color match is found. However, these cards are susceptible to fading with age and can also provide inaccurate results if lighting is not optimal. The cards also rely on the human eye to determine a match, which introduces the possibility of human error. The objectives of this study were to determine camellia (Camellia japonica L.) petal color using the RHS Colour Chart, to determine camellia petal color with the NixTM Pro color sensor (Nix Sensor Ltd., Hamilton, Ontario, Canada), and to compare these measurements using different color measuring approaches. Color measurements of camellia flower petals using the NixTM Pro color sensor were compared to published CIELAB values from the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) Colour Chart. Forty-five petal color samples were collected from fifteen different camellia shrubs. The RHS Colour Chart was used for each of the petals, and the RHS identifications were recorded. Measurements using the NixTM Pro color sensor were compared to RHS-provided CIELAB values that corresponded with the recorded identification for each petal to determine accuracy. The NixTM Pro color sensor’s measurements were also compared to a mean of the values, multiple measurements on the same petal location, and multiple measurements on different petal locations to determine precision and variation. The Nix™ Pro color sensor’s readings were precise in petal color determination and provided more nuanced differences between petals of the same plant and plants of the same variety in each of the color categories. The RHS Colour Chart provided an accurate depiction of most petals, but it was difficult to use with petals that had wide color variation over the entire petal. The Nix™ Pro color sensor’s measurements appeared to have more variation in the b* color space. However, overall, the Nix™ Pro color sensor L*, a*, and b* values were highly correlated with the provided RHS values (p < 0.01), showing that the sensor can be used as an accurate and precise substitute for the RHS Colour Chart. The Nix™ Pro color sensor can be a useful, cost-effective tool to measure the petal color of camellia and other flowering plants and rectifies many of the problems associated with the RHS Colour Chart.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.034 · 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