MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316464168 · doi:10.18280/ts.390602

Evaluation of Machine Learning Models for Plant Disease Classification Using Modified GLCM and Wavelet Based Statistical Features

2022· article· en· W4316464168 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amer Tabbakh, Soubhagya Sankar Barpanda

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSmart Agriculture and AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveletArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceStatistical learningPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, different types of plant diseases in the PlantVillage dataset are getting focused for classification.In the realm of machine vision, plant disease identification is one of the most crucial tasks in the agricultural sector.It is a technique that employs equipment to capture images to detect and classify different types of diseases in plants.However, nakedeye monitoring of plants is impractical due to long processing times and a lack of specialists on farms in remote locations.Hence, combining image processing techniques with machine learning provides a solution to the problem of agricultural production while also ensuring food security.The plant features are extracted using a modified gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) technique and based on various statistical features.Both of these approaches were applied on original images with background and segmented images without background.Wavelet transform is also used with segmented images to decompose the image into sub-bands.All the features obtained are combined and SMOTE technique is used to balance the dataset prior to classification.For the purpose of classification, six machine learning models were compared, namely Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LGBM), Random Forest (RF), Decision Trees (DT), Logistic Regression (LG), AdaBoost, and Support Vector Machine (SVM).Further, different combinations of features were experimented and the experimental results prove that employing LGBM and SVM models resulted in attaining higher accuracy values i.e. 94.39% and 93.15%, respectively.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.154 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicSmart Agriculture and AIFrench-language works237,207