Automatic classification of the phenotype textures of three <i>Thunnus</i> species based on the machine learning SVM algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tuna resources are an important part of China's pelagic fishery production. However, for China's tuna fishery, tuna species caught at sea are still manually classified, which is a time-consuming and inefficient process; so China's tuna fishery needs to develop toward automation. This study uses gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) and VGG16 to visualize phenotypic texture through local images of three Thunnus species. At the same time, texture feature index data (TFD), deep feature data (DFD), and their combined feature data (CFD) are obtained from texture images. Support vector machine (SVM) with different kernel functions is used to classify phenotypic texture of tuna automatically. The study shows that visualized texture images of different tuna using GLCM and VGG16 have biological characteristics. In the classification results without cross-validation, the average classification accuracy of TFD in polynomial was 83%, the average classification accuracy of DFD in RBF (Radial basis function) was 93%, and the average classification accuracy of CFD in RBF was 95%. It is concluded that tuna phenotype texture can be efficiently classified by using SVM with different kernel functions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".