MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fish Classification Using Convolutional Neural Network

2023· article· en· W4390550620 on OpenAlexaff
V. Deepika, Ramadhansyah Putra Jaya, Dayana Mathew, S R Nagendiran, M. Haritha, Sandra Johnson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceFish <Actinopterygii>Artificial intelligenceFisheryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current generation, people’s knowledge about the fish is reducing. So, they couldn’t classify the fishes based on their image because they look similar. That’s why we developed the model using deep learning technique to classify the fishes based on the images and also nowadays the demand of fishes is increasing and classifying the fishes are challenging.so this paper discusses the classification of fishes using the convolutional neural network which has image processing, feature extraction and image classification. The unwanted noise and distortion have been removed by image processing after that dimensionality is reduced with the help of feature extraction finally the image will classify based on the label. By using this method, we achieved 94%accuracy for the classification of the fishes using CNN.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

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)0.0000.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designObservational
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 topicWater Quality Monitoring TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207