MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387364749 · doi:10.59934/jaiea.v3i1.238

Identification of Longan Species Based on Leaf Shape Texture and Color Using KNN Classification

2023· article· en· W4387364749 on OpenAlexaff
Setia Adiyasa Lubis, Yani Maulita, Mili Alfhi Syari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)PopulationMathematicsHorticultureBotanyBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to identify the type of longan based on the shape, texture and color of the leaves using KNN classification. With a method that can identify the type of longan automatically, farmers and researchers can obtain information more quickly and accurately about the type of longan that is being cultivated or studied. This can help in choosing the right variety, more efficient maintenance, and improve the quality and productivity of longan plants. This research is an experimental research consisting of eight steps, namely preparation, theoretical studies, data collection, data analysis and processing, testing and implementation and the last is the final stage. Based on research conducted at UD Mitra Tani on Jalan Madura No. 81 Kebun Lada, Kec. Binjai Utara, Binjai City, North Sumatra, the results of data analysis from longan leaves show that the most common type of longan found in the nursery is Red longan. This study was conducted to identify the dominant longan species in the population and gain a deeper understanding of the diversity of longan varieties in the region.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA)Same topicForest Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207